De grootste diefstal uit de geschiedenis van de mens: inflatie

Ben bepaald geen fan van Bill Bonner, echter het volgende artikel van zijn hand bevat (althans zeker voor mij) aardige gezichtspunten op het financiële beleid in de VS als instrument om dollars bij te kunnen drukken en daarmee de waarde van de dollar te verminderen. Zo zou de huidige dollar volgens Bonner in vergelijking met die van 1971 nog maar 3 dollarcent waard zijn……
Eén en ander is het gevolg van de ‘nieuwe dollar’ die in 1971 onder ‘tricky dick’ Nixon werd geïntroduceerd en waarbij de Fed de macht kreeg om (fiks) dollars bij te drukken en daarmee de inflatie te voeden…….. Het grootste deel van het volk in de VS begreep niet waarom hun geld destijds zo snel in waarde verminderde en gaven de schuld aan de arabieren (vanwege de hoge olieprijs), echter de energiecrisis van de 70 er jaren bracht alleen de prijs terug op het niveau van voor de grote dollar diefstal in 1971* >> de OPEC besloot minder olie te produceren, waarop de prijzen stegen naar het niveau van voor 1971…… Zie in het artikel hieronder hoe de inflatie zelfs met dubbele cijfers groeide…… (het is een studie waard om te zien wat het effect van de nieuwe dollar en de infaltie in de VS was op de Nederlandse economie en die van de ons omringende landen….)
Inflatie is zoals Bonner zegt inderdaad een instrument om mensen nog meer belasting te laten betalen, waar de winsten daarvan in de VS vooral naar de superrijken stromen…… Terwijl 50% van de onderlaag in de VS sinds 1999 30% armer is geworden, stijgen de inkomens van de welgestelden jaar op jaar……

Vergeet bij dit alles niet dat ook in de EU, ofwel bij de Europese Centrale Bank (ECB) de geldpersen al jaren overuren maken……. Een zaak die in feite de ‘EU maatschappij’ steeds verder ontwricht…….
Lees het artikel van Bonner, overigens onderdeel uit een soort ‘dagboek’, waar je de link naar het vervolg van het hieronder opgenomen artikel, onder dat artikel terugvindt. Mocht je het interessant vinden dit ‘dagboek’ te volgen, neem dan het adres van Bonner & Partners of van Money and Markets over en houdt de boel in de gaten, dit artikel nam ik over van Money and Markets:

Bonner: The Feds and the Biggest Money Heist In History

Bonner: The Feds and the Biggest Money Heist In History
Posted by Bonner & Partners | Jan 28, 2020 | News

Inflation is always and everywhere a rip-off. – Bill Bonner

BALTIMORE, MARYLAND — The nice thing about inflation, at least from the feds’ point of view, is that it doesn’t leave fingerprints.

Today’s dollar, for example, is worth only three cents of the pre-1971 dollar. But who dunnit? Who stole 97 cents out of every dollar?

New-Buck Scam

People thought the switch to a new buck in 1971 was just a “technical” move. Still do. But there was a big difference. The old dollar was a killjoy. The feds just couldn’t have much fun with it. But the new one was like an inflatable sex toy — it would go along with anything.

And when the first wave of consumer price inflation hit in the ’70s, few people understood what had happened. They thought the Arabs had pulled a fast one. But as we saw last week (catch up here and here), the First Oil Shock only returned the real price to where it had been before the feds’ funny-money printing began.

Investors didn’t notice their pockets were being picked either. In new dollars, the Dow barely moved throughout the ’70s. But it lost 92% of its real value.

And still today, only you… and we… seem to realize how the Federal Reserve’s money printing and ultralow interest rate policies (from 2009 to 2015) put $20-some trillion into the pockets of the richest people in the country.

Most people got nothing from it. And relatively, the poor got poorer as the rich got richer.
The bottom 50% of the population are actually 30% poorer today than they were in 1999 — even using the feds’ phony inflation calculator.

But does anyone blame the real culprits? Nope. They blame the Mexicans and the Chinese.

Do they vote for someone who pledges to end inflation? Or someone who calls for more of it?

It doesn’t matter whether the inflation goes into the capital markets or the consumer economy… it works the same way, like a thief in the night. And now underway is probably the biggest heist in history…

Like a Street Mugging

Milton Friedman was wrong about inflation. It is “always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon,” said he. But that misses the point of it. A shooting star is a phenomenon. So is irritable bowel syndrome; nobody is sure what causes it.

But inflation is no more a “phenomenon” than a street mugging; it is done for a reason, to transfer wealth from some people to other people. It’s a way for the feds — and their clients, cronies, and hangers-on — to get more than taxpayers are willing to give them.

If they tried to support their boondoggles and jackass programs by direct taxation alone, there would soon be mobs gathered in the Capitol, with pitch bubbling and rails at-the-ready.

But inflation?

Here at the Diary, we guess about a great number of things — always trying to connect the dots. We’ve been at it for so long, we’ve probably been wrong about most everything. We’ll get to the rest in due course.

But one thing we’re probably not wrong about is inflation. And when the Fed announced at its December 2015 meeting that it would stop inflating and “normalize” its monetary policy, we knew it was BS. Why?

With its ultralow interest rates and its quantitative easing (QE) programs, the Fed created a hothouse atmosphere. The QE program alone gave some $3.6 trillion in new money to big investors.

It was as if a very rich person in a small town bid on all the houses that came up for sale.
Prices rose. Everyone thought he had gotten richer. But take away the reckless buyer, and the market would quickly adjust to normal supply and demand pressures. Prices would fall back to “normal.”

Falling prices would cause the “wealth effect” to reverse into a “negative wealth effect.” The economy would go into recession.

Keep the Heat On

Either you keep feeding warm air into the hothouse… or the orchids die. Greenspan, Bernanke, Yellen, and now Powell — have all kept the heat on.

The last Fed chief to turn off the heat was the recently deceased Paul Volcker. He saw the “Inflate-or-Die” trap. To escape it in 1980, he raised the Fed’s key rate to 20%, cut off the hot air, and opened the windows, causing the worst U.S. recession since the Great Depression.

Naturally, politicians, economists, and the press howled and whined. A mob even burned Volcker in effigy on the Capitol steps. But inflation quickly fell, from nearly 14% in 1980 to only 3.2% in 1983.

Years before, another great Fed chief, William McChesney Martin, explained why a good central banker is more likely to be branded a villain than a hero:

In the field of monetary and credit policy, precautionary action to prevent inflationary excesses is bound to have some onerous effects… Those who have the task of making such policy don’t expect you to applaud.

Tough Love

It’s been 40 years since Volcker’s tough love. Since then U.S. federal debt has gone from under $1 trillion to $23 trillion.

The Dow, too, went from under 1,000 to over 29,000. And the people willing to support an honest central banker — traditional fiscal conservatives and Ronald Reagan — have disappeared.

As for the old conservatives, they went AWOL when Republicans realized that, in a funny-money world, “deficits don’t matter.”

William McChesney Martin died in 1998. (He was replaced at the Fed in 1970 when he resisted the new-money plotters.) Paul Volcker died late last year.

Today, Fed jefes are willing to go along with the gag, and are described by the popular press as “saving the world” (Greenspan), or “heroes” with “the courage to act” (Bernanke).

And the current U.S. president is not worried about curbing inflation. He wants more of it. Here’s the commander in chief commenting on the Fed’s brief fling with prudence:

It was a killer when they raised the rate. It was just a big mistake. And they admit to it. They admit to it. I was right. I don’t wanna be right, but I was right.

More to come…

Regards,
Bill

This article was originally published by Bonner & Partners. You can learn more about Bill and Bill Bonner’s Diary right here.

Zie ook het vervolg van dit artikel: ‘Bonner: How Paper Money Became the Means for Modern Inflation
===============================
* In Wikipedia spreekt men bij de eerste oliecrisis in 1973 over ‘een politieke actie van de arabieren gericht tegen het westen’, terwijl de olieprijs in dollars werd en wordt weergegeven, ofwel de arabieren kregen inderdaad veel minder voor hun olie, daar de inflatie destijds zelfs met dubbele cijfers groeide, zie het artikel hierboven….. Wikipedia……
Door de inflatie van de ‘petrodollar’ (ofwel de olieprijs in dollars), was de prijs van olie op een veel lager niveau gekomen, waarop de arabieren het westen maar vooral de VS ‘de bel aanbonden’ en begonnen met de vermindering van de olieproductie, zodat de prijs omhoog ging. De olieprijs werd overigens vanaf 1971 in dollars weergegeven. (al werd ook voor die tijd vooral naar de VS gekeken wat betreft de olieprijs, daar het land eerst de grootste olieleverancier was en later tot de grootste olieproducerende landen bleef behoren)

Houthi aanval op Saoedische raffinaderijen: een grote blunder van de VS

De premature beschuldiging van de VS (al binnen 2 uur) dat Iran achter de aanslagen op de Saoedische raffinaderijen zit, heeft alles te maken met de schaamte van de VS dat al haar peperdure wapensystemen, zoals Patriot-raketten en de beste radartechnologie, geleverd aan Saoedi-Arabië, geen antwoord zijn op aanvallen met drones…….. Waaraan toegevoegd moet worden dat deze drones van een legermacht zijn (de Houthi rebellen) die zich qua materiaal niet kan meten met Saoedi-Arabië laat staan met de VS…… Kortom de VS staat flink voor paal! (en de wapenindustrie van de VS is bepaald niet blij, dat kan ik je verzekeren!)

De claim van de VS dat Iran, of sjiitische krachten in Irak achter de aanslagen zitten, kloppen niet met de ‘geografische kant’ waar de olie-installaties werden getroffen: de westelijke kant, waardoor Iran en Irak afvallen als landen van waaruit de aanslagen werden gepleegd.
Het meest frappante aan de aanslagen op de 2 raffinaderijen is wel dat de eerste drone de Patriotraketinstallatie heeft vernield, een installatie die de boel moest bewaken, waarna de rest van de drones ongestoord kon doorvliegen…..
Vergeet wat betreft deze schaamte van de VS niet dat de petrodollar, ofwel de dollar als munt waarin de prijs van olie wordt weergegeven, vooral is te danken aan Saoedi-Arabië, de grootste olieleverancier ter wereld….. De VS wil dat ten koste van alles zo houden, immers als de dollar niet langer de munt is waarin olieprijzen worden weergegeven, is de lust van andere landen om dollars te verzamelen verdwenen en zal de VS eindelijk met haar enorme schuld worden geconfronteerd, waarbij het land zelfs deels of geheel failliet zou kunnen gaan……..

Nogmaals: wat een schande dat de aanval met drones tegen de spuugrijke en dictatoriaal geregeerde terreurstaat Saoedi-Arabië zoveel aandacht trekt, terwijl men niet lult over de genocide die dezelfde terreurstaat uitvoert in buurland Jemen…….
Het volgende artikel werd geschreven door Finian Cunningham en verscheen eerder op RT, ik nam het over van Information Clearing House:
US defense failure… Why Washington has to blame Iran over Saudi attacks
By Finian Cunningham
US defense failure… Why Washington has to blame Iran over Saudi attacks
Smoke billows from an Aramco oil facility in Abqaiq © AFP

September 15, 2019 “Information Clearing House” – The devastating blitz on Saudi Arabia’s oil industry has led to a flurry of accusations from US officials blaming Iran. The reason for the finger-pointing is simple: Washington’s spectacular failure to protect its Saudi ally.

The Trump administration needs to scapegoat Iran for the latest military assault on Saudi Arabia because to acknowledge that the Houthi rebels mounted such an audacious assault on the oil kingdom’s heartland would be an admission of American inadequacy.

Saudi Arabia has spent billions of dollars in recent years purchasing US Patriot missile defense systems and supposedly cutting-edge radar technology from the Pentagon. If the Yemeni rebels can fly combat drones up to 1,000 kilometers into Saudi territory and knock out the linchpin production sites in the kingdom’s oil industry, then that should be a matter of huge embarrassment for US “protectors.”

American defense of Saudi Arabia is germane to their historical relationship. Saudi oil exports nominated in dollars for trade – the biggest on the planet – are vital for maintaining the petrodollar global market, which is in turn crucial for American economic power. In return, the US is obligated to be a protector of the Saudi monarchy, which comes with the lucrative added benefit of selling the kingdom weapons worth billions of dollars every year.

‘Maximum lies’: Iran rejects US’ claim it attacked Saudi oil facilities, warns it’s ready for war

Smoke is seen following a fire at an Aramco factory in Abqaiq, Saudi Arabia, September 14, 2019. © Reuters / Stringer


According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Saudi Arabia has the world’s third biggest military budget, behind the US and China. With an annual spend of around $68 billion, it is the world’s number one in terms of percentage of gross domestic product (8.8 per cent). Most of the Saudi arms are sourced from the US, with Patriot missile systems in particular being a recent big-ticket item.

Yet for all that financial largesse and the finest American military technology, the oil kingdom just witnessed a potentially crippling wave of air assaults on its vital oil industry. Saudi oil production at its mammoth refinery complex at Abqaiq, 205 miles (330 kms) east of the capital Riyadh, was down 50 per cent after it was engulfed by flames following air strikes. One of the Saudi’s biggest oilfields, at Khurais, also in the Eastern Province, was also partially closed.

There are credible reports that the damage is much more serious than the Saudi officials are
conceding. These key industrial sites may take weeks to repair.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo got it half right when he claimed, “Iran launched an unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply”.

Yes, it is unprecedented. But Pompeo and other US officials have most likely got it wrong about blaming Iran.

Some Trump administration officials told US media that “cruise missiles” were responsible for the giant fireballs seen over the Saudi oil facilities. One was quoted anonymously as saying: “There’s no doubt that Iran is responsible for this… there’s no escaping it. There is no other candidate.”
In a hurried effort to substantiate accusations against Iran, satellite images were released which show what appears to be the aftermath of the air strike on the Abqaiq refinery complex. US officials claim the location of the explosions indicate the weapons originated not from Yemen to the south, but from either Iran or Iraq.

Even the normally dutiful New York Times expressed doubt about that claim, commenting in its report: “The satellite photographs released on Sunday did not appear as clear cut as officials suggested, with some appearing to show damage on the western side of facilities, not from the direction of Iran or Iraq.”

The accusations made by Pompeo and others are assertions in place of substantiated claims.
It is noteworthy that President Donald Trump refrained from openly blaming Iran by name, merely hinting at the possibility. If Pompeo is so adamant in fingering Iran, why didn’t Trump? Also, the president made a telling remark when he said he was “waiting for verification” from Saudi Arabia “as to who they believe was the cause of the attack.” Again, if US officials are explicitly accusing Iran then why is Trump saying he wants “verification” from the Saudis?

For its part, Iran has flatly dismissed the allegations that it had any involvement, saying that statements by Pompeo were “blind” and tantamount to setting up a conflict.
Iraq’s Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi also rejected claims that his country’s territory might have been used by pro-Iranian Shia militants to launch the air strikes.

The Houthi rebels in Yemen have issued unambiguous statements claiming responsibility for the air raids on the Saudi oil installations. They were specific that the weapons were drones, not missiles, adding with details that 10 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) were deployed.

Notably too, most US media reported initially that the attacks were by drones flown from Yemen. Associated Press reported a level of sophistication in the attacks whereby drones were used first to disable the US Patriot radar systems before other UAVs proceeded to execute the air strikes.
It therefore seems that US officials are attempting to switch the story by blaming Iran. It is reckless scapegoating because the logical consequence could elicit a military attack against Iran, in which event Tehran has warned it is ready for war.

The rationale for blaming Iran is that the Yemeni rebels (which Iran supports politically) are just not capable of using drones with such dramatic success against the Saudi oil industry. The culprit must be Iran, so the rationale goes. This is a follow-on from alleged sabotage by Iran against oil tankers in the Persian Gulf earlier this summer.

However, a timeline shows that the Houthis are more than capable of launching ever-more powerful ballistic missiles and deeper penetrating drones into Saudi territory. The rebels have been using drones from the beginning of the war which the US-backed Saudi-UAE coalition launched on the southern Arabian country in March 2015.

Over the past four years, the Houthi aerial firepower has gradually improved. Earlier, the Saudis, with American defense systems, were able to intercept drones and missiles from Yemen. But over the last year, the rebels have increased their success rate for hitting targets in the Saudi interior, including the capital Riyadh.

In May this year, Houthi drones hit Saudi Arabia’s crucial east-west pipeline. Then in August, drones and ballistic missiles were reported to have struck the Shaybah oil field near the border with the United Arab Emirates (UAE), as well as the Dammam exporting complex in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province.

The Yemenis claim they are taking the war to Saudi Arabia and the UAE after years of relentless air strikes on their homeland which have resulted in nearly 90,000 dead. A recent UN report censured the US, Britain and France for possible complicity in war crimes through their military support for the Saudi coalition.

There must be trepidation among the monarchs in Saudi Arabia and the UAE that the rebels from war-torn and starving Yemen are now coming after them with drones that could demolish their oil economies. What’s more, the much-vaunted American protector is not able to deliver on its strategic bargain, despite billions of dollars of Pentagon weaponry. That’s why Washington has to find an excuse by casting Iran as the villain.

Finian Cunningham has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent.


This article was originally published by “RT
=======================================
Patriot-raketten vernietigen met een drone….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Zie ook:
Jemen: de laatste ziekenhuizen moeten sluiten >> alle brandstof is op…..


´Saoediërs bombarderen Jemen na aanbod Houthi’s tot wapenstilstand´

Duitsland, Frankrijk en Groot-Brittannië: Iran is de dader, er is geen andere plausibele verklaring voor de aanval op Saoedische olie-installaties

Iran dreigt met volledige oorlog bij vergeldingsaanval voor aanslag op Saoedische olie-installaties

Iran klaar voor oorlog tegen de VS

‘Maximum lies’: Iran rejects US’ claim it attacked Saudi oil facilities, warns it’s ready for war

US Continues to Escalate Tensions, Raising Fear of Imminent War With Iran

US Might Send 10,000 More Troops to Middle East


Yemen Be Damned, Pompeo Doubles Down on US Support for Saudi Arabia

VS vermoordt Iraniërs met sancties, EU doodstil…….

De VS is bezig om binnenkort nog meer sancties op te leggen aan Iran, het gaat nu niet alleen meer om de Iran deal, maar om een verandering van regering, althans anders zijn de VS sancties niet uit te leggen…….

Het meest schunnige is wel dat de VS de Iraanse autoriteiten verwijdt haar volk te terroriseren, terwijl je daar maar één ‘land’ van kan beschuldigen, de grootste terreurentiteit op onze aarde, de VS zelf!!!

De psychopathische oorlogsmisdadiger Mattis en anderen verdraaien de werkelijkheid op zo’n belachelijk grove schaal dat het net lijkt of Iran haar eigen burgers laat sterven, terwijl de VS de werkelijke dader is……..

Zelfs levensreddende medicijnen zijn nu moeilijk te krijgen in Iran, het is werkelijk om te janken als je de voorbeelden leest in het hieronder opgenomen artikel, geschreven door Caitlin Johnstone.

Hoe is het mogelijk dat EU landen de VS niet al lang in de VN Veiligheidsraad hebben aangeklaagd voor grootschalige terreur??? En hoe is het mogelijk dat de EU Iran niet te hulp snelt……….

Het is te hopen dat het Internationaal Strafhof (ICC) ten minste de enorme oorlogsmisdaden inventariseert die werden en worden begaan door de VS en onder die oorlogsmisdaden reken ik tegenwoordig ook de economische oorlogsvoering van de VS tegen landen die haar onwelgevallig zijn, zoals Iran, Venezuela en Nicaragua……… Sancties die in feite nooit de leiding van het betreffende land schaden, maar het volk van dat land, waarmee je deze sancties rustig als misdaad tegen de menselijkheid kan duiden, of zoals gezegd oorlogsmisdaden…….

De hoogste tijd dat de internationale gemeenschap de VS opdraagt haar troepen overal ter wereld terug te trekken, het barbaarse neokoloniale beleid van de VS moet gestopt worden! Bovendien dient men als de sodemieter af te stappen van de dollar als internationaal betaalmiddel (als de VS er financieel zo voor had gestaan, maar dan in de 20er jaren van de vorige eeuw, had men daar, net als destijds in Duitsland, bij wijze van spreken een kruiwagen vol met papiergeld nodig gehad om een brood te kopen…..).

De oorzaak van dat niet ingrijpen en bijvoorbeeld wel terechte sancties op te leggen aan de VS, is puur en alleen te danken aan het feit dat de dollar als internationaal betaalmiddel wordt gebruikt, terwijl de VS in feite meer dan failliet is >> de staatsschuld van de VS is niet meer in cijfers weer te geven……. Vandaar ook dat ons financiële systeem zal instorten als de dollar echt volledig onderuitgaat, iets dat welhaast niet is te voorkomen…… (ondanks dat men dit weet, worden er geen maatregelen genomen, alsof het om een konijn gaat dat in het koplicht van een aanstormende auto verstijft….)

US Blames Iran for Impoverishing Civilians While Prepping

Further Sanctions

November 1, 2018 at 12:28 pm
Written by Caitlin Johnstone
(CJ Opinion) — The United States government is preparing to implement an additional level of sanctions against Iran for its refusal to meet a dozen demands that are so absurdly unreasonable that they have been called a regime change policy in all but name. The sanctions which have already been implemented have already badly hurt the Iranian economy, the sting of which is being felt first and foremost by Iran’s poor and sickly.
In an article titled “Iran’s poor to bear brunt of Trump’s oil sanctions”, Financial Times documents how poor Iranians are already strained to the breaking point from the cutbacks they’ve had to make in food and groceries. An article titled “In Iran, US sanctions are being felt, with harsher measures to come” by the Christian Science Monitor details difficulties Iranian charities are having getting medicine to sick children, including chemotherapy treatment, having already run out of four life-saving drugs. In an article titled “US fails to shield humanitarian trade with Iran as sanctions loom”, Al Monitor details the way humanitarian aid, while ostensibly exempt from the sanctions, has been severely impacted by their economic aspect because humanitarian aid costs money. The Wall Street Journal further explains the effects of America’s economic warfare on ordinary Iranian civilians in an article titled “Iran Moves to Shelter Millions as U.S. Sanctions Bite”.
This is before the US implements a new level of attacks upon Iran’s oil industry, a primary economic lifeline, which is scheduled to begin on November fifth. If Iran can’t find a way to get around these crushing sanctions in a significant way, many civilians already stretched far too thin will be pushed past the breaking point.
And who is the US government blaming for the consequences of its economic warfare? Why, the Iranian government, of course.
The International Monetary Fund @IMFNews is projecting a 3.6% decline in ’s economy next year. That’s what happens when the ruling regime steals from its people and invests in Assad—instead of creating jobs for Iranians, they ruin the economy.
The International Monetary Fund @IMFNews is projecting a 3.6% decline in #Iran’s economy next year,” tweeted Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. “That’s what happens when the ruling regime steals from its people and invests in Assad — instead of creating jobs for Iranians, they ruin the economy.”
Pompeo talks about the Iranian people a lot. A recent State Department release is packed with lines like “Iran’s actions have made the country a pariah, much to the despair of its own people”, and “clerics and officials have wrapped themselves in the cloak of religion while robbing the Iranian people blind,” and “The United States is asking every nation that is sick and tired of the Islamic Republic’s destructive behavior to stand up for the Iranian people.” But Mike Pompeo does not care about the Iranian people. Plainly.
Sanctions are so weird. Imagine if the US government had listed twelve ridiculously extreme demands of Tehran, and then when those demands weren’t met they launched a few dozen Tomahawk missiles into an Iranian suburb. And imagine, if you will, what the response would be if Secretary Pompeo had then issued a tweet saying “Boy, it sure was awful of the Iranian regime to launch those missiles at its own civilians!”
He would never do such a thing, of course, because nobody would buy it. But for some weird, entirely narrative-based reason, the US government can get away with killing the same number of civilians by depriving them of food and medicine and say it’s Iran’s fault for not bowing to Washington’s twelve demands. The civilians would be just as dead as they would have been if they were killed by Tomahawk missiles, and the US government would be just as culpable for their deaths as they would have been if they’d killed them by missile strike. We can be absolutely certain that the US government would acknowledge such economic sanctions as an act of war (which they unquestionably are) if any foreign nation ever implemented anything similar against America. But for some weird, stupid, nonsense reason, the medieval siege tactic of starving them to death and cutting them off from supplies is something that can still be blamed on a sovereign nation for refusing to obey the commands of a foreign government. For some weird, stupid, nonsense reason, sanctions are the only form of warfare where it is considered both legal and acceptable to deliberately target a civilian population with lethal force.
My grandmother in Iran has gone blind in one eye because she can no longer access her diabetes medicine. Thanks America

My grandmother in Iran has gone blind in one eye because she can no longer access her diabetes medicine. Thanks America

The responses to this Tweet caught me off guard. Thank you for the kind words. But now I feel selfish for writing it. I didn’t want or expect sympathy; I wanted to make a point about the impact of sanctions on Iran — that it’s the ordinary people who suffer. And for what?

This, by the way, is all coming after the UN’s highest court, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), ordered the United States to remove any impediments to humanitarian aide in the sanctions that it has implemented, to which Washington responded by withdrawing from two international agreements which could lead to any legally binding rulings by the ICJ. Any other nation which refuses to comply with UN rulings is branded a rogue nation by the US-centralized empire and targeted for regime change, but when the US does exactly the same thing we’re meant to look at it as perfectly normal and acceptable.
The US has defended its dismissal of the ICJ ruling by citing the exemptions it has made for humanitarian aide in its sanctions, with Secretary Pompeo asserting the following:
Existing exceptions, authorizations, and licensing policies for humanitarian-related transactions and safety of flight will remain in effect. The United States has been actively engaged on these issues without regard to any proceeding before the ICJ. We’re working closely with the Department of the Treasury to ensure that certain humanitarian-related transactions involving Iran can and will continue.”
Not only is he not being accurate, he is lying,” Trita Parsi of the National Iranian American Council told the Real News of Pompeo’s remarks. “The Trump administration has not issued a single license since they took power. They know quite well that they’re doing everything to scare banks away from the Iranian market, which then is affecting the ability for the Iranians to pay for medicine and medical supplies, even though that is supposedly exempt. So essentially what they’re saying, hey, we made those exempt. Yes, but you have targeted the financial system so harshly, so indiscriminately, so no bank is willing to handle transactions with Iranian banks. And as a result the Iranians cannot buy medical supplies, and their medical shortages are a direct result of the sanctions.”
What will Secretary Pompeo say when civilians begin dropping dead? Will he claim that “the price is worth it”, as his predecessor Madeleine Albright said of the thousands of Iraqi children killed in sanctions upon Iraq? Will he cite the constantly recurring lie that it is because Iran is the world’s top sponsor of terrorism? Will he claim that it is because it is somehow wrong for Iran to defend its ally Syria from the violent jihadist factions who attempted to effect regime change in Damascus with western backing? Or will he just be honest, and admit that it’s because Iran has one of the few governments in the strategically crucial and resource-rich Middle East which has refused to be absorbed into the blob of the US empire?
Hey, a girl can dream.


Support Caitlin’s work on Patreon or Paypal.

Opinion by Caitlin Johnstone / Republished with permission / Medium / Report a typo

===============================
Zie ook:
Trump administratie chanteert en bedreigt de EU over ‘schending’ onterechte VS-sancties tegen Iran

Iran houdt zich aan nucleair verdrag, ondanks VS agressie

SWIFT betalingssysteem raakt monopolie (gelukkig) kwijt

VS, Saoedi-Arabië en Israël willen Iraanse bewind verdrijven met terreur, moord, sabotage en manipulatie van het nieuws…

Frankrijk beschermt Iran tegen de ‘politieagent’ van de wereld, de VS

The New Tyranny of the Dollar

Saoedi-Arabië vindt zich een baken van licht tegen het duister verspreidende Iran….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Jeremy Bowen (BBC correspondent) vindt Iran een gevaar voor het Midden-Oosten

Trump volgt het scenario van deep state: oorlog met Iran ‘is onvermijdelijk….’

Rudy Giuliani viert het sterven van Iraniërs en stelt desondanks dat het Iraanse bewind door de VS geweldloos zal ondergaan…….

Iraanse protesten gezien door de propaganda bril van de VS en de rest van het westen……..

Protesten Iran opgezet door de VS en Israël

Iraanse protesten allesbehalve compleet spontaan (zoals VS ambassadeur bij de VN Haley durfde te stellen…)….

US Empire Is Running The Same Script With Iran That It Ran With Libya, Syria

Nikki Haley (VS ambassadeur in de VN) bedreigt sjiitisch Iran met militair ingrijpen……‘ (klik ook op de links onder dat bericht)

VS liegt schaamteloos om het westen verder op te zetten tegen Iran……..

Reagan middels manipulaties tot president gekozen; waarom de gijzelaars in Iran moesten wachten op hun vrijheid….

Saoedi-Arabië beschuldigt Houthi’s en Iran van raketbeschieting en noemt dit een oorlogsverklaring…………

en zie:

Warmonger Called Out on Live TV After Pretending to Care About Iranian Protesters

VS en de enorme armoede ‘in één van de rijkste landen’

U snapt dat de kop ‘niet helemaal klopt’ met de realiteit, echter dit was wel de kop boven een artikel in The Guardian, dat ik via het blog van Stan van Houcke vond. In werkelijkheid heeft de VS zo’n grote schuld, dat deze nog niet in 100 jaar kan worden terugverdiend, m.a.w. het land is feitelijk failliet…..

Het feit dat de dollar nog steeds wordt gebruikt als internationaal betaalmiddel, bijvoorbeeld voor de olieprijs, plus de enorme hoeveelheden VS dollars in andere landen, houden de VS nog op de been, zo heeft China vele miljarden dollars in bezit…..

Wel is het te schofterig voor woorden dat de welgestelden steeds rijker worden in de VS en de onderlaag steeds verder wegzakt*, terwijl het land meer dan 600 miljard uitgeeft aan ‘defensie’ (ofwel oorlogsvoering),…….. De reden waarom onze politici als een stel schapen staan te blaten dat we meer uit moeten geven aan defensie, alsof ons meedoen aan die illegale oorlogen, tegen enorme kapitalen aan belastinggeld, de normaalste zaak van de wereld is………

Daarnaast zien de meeste westerse politici lullig genoeg de uiterst oneerlijke en onmenselijke VS maatschappij nog steeds als lichtend voorbeeld…….

Een normaal dak boven je hoofd en een fatsoenlijke maaltijd zijn nog steeds basis mensenrechten…….

Hier een aantal foto’s die het artikel van The Guardian begeleiden. Een reis door de vreselijke armoede van de VS met Philip Alston, speciaal VN rapporteur extreme armoede en mensenrechten. Voor het volledige, ontluisterende (originele) artikel en de tekst kan u onder de laatste foto klikken.

A journey through a land of extreme poverty: welcome to America

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor A journey through a land of extreme poverty: welcome to America


Philip Alston in downtown LA. Photograph: Dan Tuffs for the Guardian


David Busch, who is currently homeless on Venice beach, in Los Angeles. Photograph: Dan Tuffs for the Guardian


Ressy Finley, who lives in a tent on 6th Street in Downtown LA. Photograph: Dan Tuffs for the Guardian

The Gubbio project at St Boniface in San Francisco. The church opens its doors every weekday at 6am to allow homeless people to rest until 3pm. Photograph: David Levene for the Guardian


Coy Catley, 63, in her homeless box made of cardboard sheets on a sidewalk of Tenderloin, San Francisco. Photograph: Ed Pilkington for the Guardian


Aaron Thigpen discusses the poor sewage conditions in Butler County. Improper treatment has put the population at risk of diseases long believed to be extinct in the US. Photograph: Bob Miller for the Guardian




Philp Alston talks to a resident. Many families in Butler and Lowndes counties choose to live with open sewer systems made from PVC pipe. Photograph: Bob Miller for the Guardian



Alston inspects the residence of Norma Judith Colón, which was damaged by Hurricane María. Photograph: José Jiménez-Tirado/Getty Imag


Norma Judith Colón stands in front of her damaged home after hurricane María. Photograph: José Jiménez-Tirado/Getty Imag


A patient who came into the clinic needing all 30 of his teeth to have root canal surgery. Photograph: Doctors at Health Right

Hier de link naar het originele artikel.

Zie ook de volgende artikelen:

Trump turning US into ‘world champion of extreme inequality’, UN envoy warns


Extreme poverty in America: read the UN special monitor’s report


=========================

* Zoals je wellicht weet is dit in praktisch de hele westerse wereld aan de gang, het ‘zaligmakende’ inhumane neoliberalisme, dat door de meeste politieke partijen van ‘links’ tot rechts wordt aangehangen en uitgedragen, is daar debet aan…….. Al is de situatie in de VS wel het meest schrijnend, zeker als je ziet hoeveel geld er daar over de balk wordt gegooid voor ‘defensie’, lees: illegale oorlogsvoering en hoe weinig de (super) welgestelden en bedrijven aan belasting betalen……

Zie ook: ‘Arizona: vanaf nu levenslang recht op niet meer dan 12 maanden bijstand……..

en: ‘’90 jarige ‘activist’ in het land van hoop en glorie gearresteerd voor het uitdelen van voedsel aan daklozen…….

en: ‘Willem Post en Hans Veldman met open deuren boek ‘De spiegel van Amerika…….’

en: ‘Trump: VS heeft een geweldige prestatie geleverd met de hulp aan Puerto Rico na orkaan Maria………. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

en: ‘‘Amerika het land van de onbegrensde mogelijkheden…. Arme patiënt uit ziekenhuis gezet!’

en: ‘VS hypocrisie t.a.v. knielende footballspelers……….


en: ‘Daklozen in de VS, het land van ‘hoop en glorie’, worden massaal gedeporteerd…………


Mijn excuus voor de belabberde vormgeving (ook de reden waarom ik de tekst niet overnam, daar e.e.a. er dan nog slechter uitziet).

Libië, het echte motief voor de illegale oorlog tegen dat land, met in de hoofdrol Hillary Clinton…..

Stan van Houcke bracht gisteren een artikel over het motief achter de illegale oorlog tegen Libië, gebaseerd de de e-mails van Hillary Clinton, e-mails gelekt via WikiLeaks. Het artikel werd geschreven door Brad Hoff en gepubliceerd op Africa, News & Analysis.

Brad beschrijft de vele leugens, waarmee men Khadaffi zwart maakte, o.a. het verhaal dat hij zijn soldaten Viagra zou hebben gegeven, zodat ze beter konden verkrachten. Een verhaal dat onderuit werd gehaald door NB Amnesty International (kom daar nu nog maar eens voor…), maar dat desondanks ‘een eigen leven ging leiden……’

Een kleine stad met 30.000 zwarte en donkergekleurde Libiërs, loyaal aan Khadaffi verdween in het geheel, deze mensen werden geëxecuteerd, gemarteld en gevangengezet, wat er van hen geworden is, is vooralsnog niet bekend, uiteraard niet gemeld door de westerse politici en reguliere media………. Let wel: dit gebeurde door terreurtroepen, die door het westen werden gesteund……

Dan is daar nog de kwestie van Khadaffi’s goud en zilver, waarmee hij een Afrikaanse munt van de grond wilde tillen, geld gefundeerd op edelmetaal en niet op lucht zoals in het westen….. Jammer dat er in dit bericht niet over wordt gerept, dat Khadaffi volgens alweer WikiLeaks, met de ‘gouden dinar’ ook de (olie-) dollar, de gangbare munt voor oliewaarderingen wilde vervangen, iets wat hem in Washington op z’n zachtst gezegd nog minder geliefd maakte…….

Lees en huiver:

Hillary Emails Reveal True Motive for Libya Intervention

By Brad Hoff | Jan 6, 2016 | Africa, News & Analysis, US | 332
Newly disclosed emails show that Libya’s plan to create a gold-backed currency to compete with the euro and dollar was a motive for NATO’s intervention.
The New Year’s Eve release of over 3,000 new Hillary Clinton emails from the State Department has CNN abuzz over gossipy text messages, the “who gets to ride with Hillary” selection process set up by her staff, and how a “cute” Hillary photo fared on Facebook.
But historians of the 2011 NATO war in Libya will be sure to notice a few of the truly explosive confirmations contained in the new emails: admissions of rebel war crimes, special ops trainers inside Libya from nearly the start of protests, Al Qaeda embedded in the U.S. backed opposition, Western nations jockeying for access to Libyan oil, the nefarious origins of the absurd Viagra mass rape claim, and concern over Gaddafi’s gold and silver reserves threatening European currency.

Hillary’s Death Squads

A March 27, 2011, intelligence brief [archived here] on Libya, sent by long time close adviser to the Clintons and Hillary’s unofficial intelligence gatherer, Sidney Blumenthal, contains clear evidence of war crimes on the part of NATO-backed rebels. Citing a rebel commander source “speaking in strict confidence” Blumenthal reports to Hillary [emphasis mine]:
Under attack from allied Air and Naval forces, the Libyan Army troops have begun to desert to the rebel side in increasing numbers. The rebels are making an effort to greet these troops as fellow Libyans, in an effort to encourage additional defections.
(Source Comment: Speaking in strict confidence, one rebel commander stated that his troops continue to summarily execute all foreign mercenaries captured in the fighting…).
While the illegality of extra-judicial killings is easy to recognize (groups engaged in such are conventionally termed “death squads”), the sinister reality behind the “foreign mercenaries” reference might not be as immediately evident to most.
While over the decades Gaddafi was known to make use of European and other international security and infrastructural contractors, there is no evidence to suggest that these were targeted by the Libyan rebels.
There is, however, ample documentation by journalists, academics, and human rights groups demonstrating that black Libyan civilians and sub-Saharan contract workers, a population favored by Gaddafi in his pro-African Union policies, were targets of “racial cleansing” by rebels who saw black Libyans as tied closely with the regime.[1]
Black Libyans were commonly branded as “foreign mercenaries” by the rebel opposition for their perceived general loyalty to Gaddafi as a community and subjected to torture, executions, and their towns “liberated” by ethnic cleansing. This is demonstrated in the most well-documented example of Tawergha, an entire town of 30,000 black and “dark-skinned” Libyans which vanished by August 2011 after its takeover by NATO-backed NTC Misratan brigades.
These attacks were well-known as late as 2012 and often filmed, as this report from The Telegraph confirms:
After Muammar Gaddafi was killed, hundreds of migrant workers from neighboring states were imprisoned by fighters allied to the new interim authorities. They accuse the black Africans of having been mercenaries for the late ruler. Thousands of sub-Saharan Africans have been rounded up since Gaddafi fell in August.

It appears that Clinton was getting personally briefed on the battlefield crimes of her beloved anti-Gaddafi fighters long before some of the worst of these genocidal crimes took place.


Al-Qaeda and Western Special Forces Inside Libya

The same intelligence email from Sydney Blumenthal also confirms what has become a well-known theme of Western supported insurgencies in the Middle East: the contradiction of special forces training militias that are simultaneously suspected of links to Al Qaeda.
Blumenthal relates that “an extremely sensitive source” confirmed that British, French, and Egyptian special operations units were training Libyan militants along the Egyptian-Libyan border, as well as in Benghazi suburbs.
While analysts have long speculated as to the “when and where” of Western ground troop presence in the Libyan War, this email serves as definitive proof that special forces were on the ground only within a month of the earliest protests which broke out in the middle to end of February 2011 in Benghazi.
By March 27 of what was commonly assumed a simple “popular uprising” external special operatives were already “overseeing the transfer of weapons and supplies to the rebels” including “a seemingly endless supply of AK47 assault rifles and ammunition.”

Yet only a few paragraphs after this admission, caution is voiced about the very militias these Western special forces were training because of concern that, “radical/terrorist groups such as the Libyan Fighting Groups and Al Qa’ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) are infiltrating the NLC and its military command.”

The Threat of Libya’s Oil and Gold to French Interests

Though the French-proposed U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 claimed the no-fly zone implemented over Libya was to protect civilians, an April 2011 email [archived here] sent to Hillary with the subject line “France’s client and Qaddafi’s gold” tells of less noble ambitions.
The email identifies French President Nicholas Sarkozy as leading the attack on Libya with five specific purposes in mind: to obtain Libyan oil, ensure French influence in the region, increase Sarkozy’s reputation domestically, assert French military power, and to prevent Gaddafi’s influence in what is considered “Francophone Africa.”
Most astounding is the lengthy section delineating the huge threat that Gaddafi’s gold and silver reserves, estimated at “143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver,” posed to the French franc (CFA) circulating as a prime African currency. In place of the noble sounding “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) doctrine fed to the public, there is this “confidential” explanation of what was really driving the war [emphasis mine]:
This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc (CFA).
(Source Comment: According to knowledgeable individuals this quantity of gold and silver is valued at more than $7 billion. French intelligence officers discovered this plan shortly after the current rebellion began, and this was one of the factors that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya.)
Though this internal email aims to summarize the motivating factors driving France’s (and by implication NATO’s) intervention in Libya, it is interesting to note that saving civilian lives is conspicuously absent from the briefing.
Instead, the great fear reported is that Libya might lead North Africa into a high degree of economic independence with a new pan-African currency.

French intelligence “discovered” a Libyan initiative to freely compete with European currency through a local alternative, and this had to be subverted through military aggression.


The Ease of Floating Crude Propaganda

Early in the Libyan conflict Secretary of State Clinton formally accused Gaddafi and his army of using mass rape as a tool of war. Though numerous international organizations, like Amnesty International, quickly debunked these claims, the charges were uncritically echoed by Western politicians and major media.
It seemed no matter how bizarre the conspiracy theory, as long as it painted Gaddafi and his supporters as monsters, and so long as it served the cause of prolonged military action in Libya, it was deemed credible by network news.
Two foremost examples are referenced in the latest batch of emails: the
sensational claim that Gaddafi issued Viagra to his troops for mass rape, and the claim that bodies were “staged” by the Libyan government at NATO bombing sites to give the appearance of the Western coalition bombing civilians.
In a late March 2011 email, Blumenthal confesses to Hillary that,
I communicated more than a week ago on this story—Qaddafi placing bodies to create PR stunts about supposed civilian casualties as a result of Allied bombing—though underlining it was a rumor. But now, as you know, Robert gates gives credence to it. (See story below.)
Sources now say, again rumor (that is, this information comes from the rebel side and is unconfirmed independently by Western intelligence), that Qaddafi has adopted a rape policy and has even distributed Viagra to troops. The incident at the Tripoli press conference involving a woman claiming to be raped is likely to be part of a much larger outrage. Will seek further confirmation.
Not only did Defense Secretary Robert Gates promote his bizarre “staged bodies” theory on CBS News’ “Face The Nation,” but the even stranger Viagra rape fiction made international headlines as U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice made a formal charge against Libya in front of the UN Security Council.
What this new email confirms is that not only was the State Department aware of the spurious nature of what Blumenthal calls “rumors” originating solely with the rebels, but did nothing to stop false information from rising to top officials who then gave them “credence.”

It appears, furthermore, that the Viagra mass rape hoax likely originated with Sidney Blumenthal himself.


Note

[1] The most comprehensive and well-documented study of the plight of black Libyans is contained in Slouching Towards Sirte: NATO’s War on Libya and Africa (publ. 2012, Baraka Books) by Maximilian Forte, Professor Anthropology and Sociology at Concordia University in Montréal, Québec.
This article was originally published at the Levant Report and has been used here with permission.

Brad Hoff

Brad Hoff served as a Marine from 2000-2004 at Headquarters Battalion, Quantico. After military service he lived, studied, and traveled throughout Syria off and on from 2004-2010. He is Managing Editor of LevantReport.com and currently teaches in Texas.

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.

Devalueer de euro eindelijk!

Een hopeloze zaak, maar ik kaart ‘t hier nog maar eens aan: waarom wordt de euro niet gedevalueerd? Zeker als je de kwartaalcijfers van veel bedrijven hoort, als één van de redenen voor slechte prestaties wordt de dure euro genoemd. Logisch, als de euro duur is, is exporteren een heel stuk moeilijker, dan wanneer de euro rond de waarde van de dollar zou staan. Toen we begonnen met de euro, stond de euro t.o.v. de dollar rond de 88 dollarcent, dit is volkomen omgedraaid, tegenwoordig ligt de koers van de euro t.o.v. de dollar zelfs rond de $ 1.38!!! wat is er in godsnaam op tegen, de euro op ongeveer de dollar waarde te stellen, scheelt meteen een hele berg schuld bij de Zuid-Europese schuldenlanden en bij particulieren met een grote hypotheekschuld*, of andere schulden!!! Bovendien kan de industrie dan makkelijker exporteren, ook dat brengt weer extra geld in de (belasting)pot!!! Om een domme uitspraak aan te halen: een win win situatie!!!

*In Nederland bijna 700 miljard hypotheekschuld! Waar bij lange na niet eens de helft aan werkelijke huizenwaarde tegenover staat!