Hillary Clinton en geheime dienst achter ontslag Flynn, en naar voren schuiven Pence, aldus Assange…….

Posted on March 17, 2017 by Telmo Claro

Afgelopen dinsdag ontving ik het volgende artikel van Anti-Media, die het overnam van ZeroHedge. In dit artikel de beschuldiging van Assange, dat de Clinton-kliek in samenwerking met geheime diensten, de positie van Flynn onmogelijk hebben gemaakt…..*

Flynn was voorstander van vriendschapsbanden met Rusland, een enorme fout, in ‘een land’ dat o.a. wordt geregeerd door de geheime diensten en het militair-industrieel complex. Als vervanging voor Flynn schoof men Pence naar voren, een oorlogshitser van formaat en een enorme Rusland hater.

Tyler Durden, de schrijver van het artikel vraagt zich volkomen terecht af, wat er tegen is, om de banden met Rusland te vernieuwen >> hoe kan dit het leven van ‘Amerikaanse burgers’ in gevaar brengen..??? (inderdaad te belachelijk voor woorden!!)

Durden betoogt dat Trump onder druk werd gezet, om Flynn te dwingen af te treden, daar hij anders zelf de kans zou lopen afgezet te worden (‘impeachment’)……… Dat Trump heeft toegegeven blijkt wel uit het feit, dat de VS meer troepen naar Syrië heeft gestuurd, dit om uiteindelijk Assad af te zetten, aldus Durden…… Waar ik aan toe zou willen voegen , dat de VS nog meer troepen naar Europa heeft gestuurd en nog wil sturen, dit tegen het zogenaamde Russische gevaar……..

Hier het artikel, zoals geplaatst op Anti-Media:

Assange: Hillary, Intel Officials ‘Quietly Pushing A Pence Takeover’ of the White House

March 14, 2017 at 10:38 am

Written by Anti-Media News Desk

(ZHE) Last week we noted chatter that some saw Mike Pence as “the Deep State’s insurance policy,” and now, judging by tweets from Wikileaks’ Julian Assange, that may well be the Clinton/Intelligence Officials plan…

Adding that…

As The Daily Caller notes, Assange’s claims appear to come in response to reports that President Trump authorized the CIA to perform drone strikes on terrorists Monday evening…

Julian Assange @JulianAssange

By handing unilateral power to the CIA over its drone strikes at this time White House signals that bullying, disloyalty & incompetence pays

11:04 AM – 14 Mar 2017

As we concluded previously, if Trump doesn’t adopt the Cold War 2.0 approach of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and is forced out of his own administration in the same manner as Flynn, it will become clear why once we learn who would replace him: Mike Pence.

No matter what one makes of Trump – or his administration and the policies that have been initiated thus far – the fact remains that Trump won the U.S. election. The people working behind the scenes to oust him are not subject to democratic controls, nor are they working in the best interests of the American public. We are left to ask ourselves exactly how renewing relations with Russia – a nuclear power – could possibly endanger American lives.

Either way, we are more or less left with two paths ahead of us. The first path involves Trump giving in and adopting an anti-Russian agenda, as is already apparent in his decision to send more ground troops to Syria alongside Saudi troops, who will intentionally oppose the Syrian regime (a close ally of Russia). The second involves the possibility of another direct coup within the Trump administration, this time one that may ultimately force Trump out of the White House so he can be replaced by Mike Pence, a war hawk who will be more than happy to do the job Hillary Clinton wanted to do.

By Tyler Durden / Republished with permission / Zero Hedge / Report a typo

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

* Flynn moest aftreden, daar hij al contact met de Russen zocht voor het aantreden van Trump. Een volkomen normale zaak. Zo hebben adviseurs en ministers van de ‘komende’ president, vrijwel altijd voor het aantreden, contact met Israël, maar ook met NAVO staten en andere landen, die er toe doen. De huidige gang van zaken is dan ook duidelijk gericht tegen de poging van Trump, de spanningen tussen de VS en Rusland weg te werken……….

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

Media stilte over dood 4 Russische diplomaten………

Posted on February 25, 2017 by Telmo Claro

Mensen, je hebt van die berichten waarvan je onmiddellijk denkt, hoe is ‘t in godsnaam mogelijk? Zo kreeg ik Gisteren van Anti-Media het volgende bericht, over 4 Russische diplomaten die kort na elkaar zijn gestorven, terwijl de media er geen of weinig aandacht voor hadden.

Uiteraard gaat het in dit bericht vooral over de media in de VS. In de EU, althans Duitsland, België, Nederland en Groot-Brittannië, was de moord op de Russische ambassadeur in Turkije, Andrey Karlov, wel degelijk groot nieuws. Ook al besteedde men amper aandacht aan de dader en waarom deze Karlov vermoordde, men lulde gewoon na, wat de Turkse autoriteiten oplepelden………

Karlov was de eerste van 4 Russische diplomaten die om het leven kwam, daarna volgden nog 2 ambassadeurs en een hoge Russische diplomaat……

Toevallig in een tijd, waar diplomatie van ervaren diplomaten hoognodig was, daar de spanningen tussen de VS en Rusland bijna met de dag groeiden (en intussen weer groeien…)…..

In het kader van deze zaken, maar vooral wat betreft de moord op Karlov, valt ook de zogenaamde suïcide van Yves Chandelon op, een NAVO boekhouder*.

Hier het artikel van Anti-Media:

Media Silent As 4 Top Russian Diplomats Die

(MPN) While few might consider being a diplomat a life-threatening or even dangerous job, that trend may be quickly reversing — that is, at least for Russian diplomats.

With recent media attention squarely focused on Donald Trump’s ascension to the Oval Office and various controversies swirling throughout the early days of his presidency, a string of sudden, mysterious deaths of top Russian diplomats have largely evaded media scrutiny and public attention.

Further, public interest in these deaths, at least in the United States, has been minimized, as much of the negative press Trump has received along the same timeframe has been related to his allegedly close relationship with the Russian government, tying in with months of anti-Russian propaganda relating to the Syrian conflict and allegations that Russia had a role in manipulating the U.S. presidential election.

Since late December, four top Russian diplomats, including three ambassadors, have died under circumstances that remain unclear.

This troublesome trend began on Dec. 20, when Andrey Karlov, Russia’s ambassador to Turkey, was gunned down in Ankara during a photo exhibition event. The assailant, a 22-year-old off-duty Turkish police officer, took advantage of the bloody spectacle to yell, “Don’t forget Aleppo!” — a reference to Russia’s controversial role in helping the Syrian government reclaim what was once the country’s largest city from U.S.-backed Al-Qaida terrorists.

Karlov’s death came at a critical juncture in Russian-Turkish relations, as the two nations were in the midst of reconciliation efforts following an incident in which Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet over Syria in 2015, damaging diplomatic relations.

Russian President Vladimir Putin called Karlov’s assassination a clear provocation intended to derail Syrian peace negotiations. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan echoed these sentiments, adding, “Both Turkey and Russia have the will not to be deceived by this false flag attack.”

However, media attention of the assassination was derailed, as it took place on the same day as a high-profile terrorist attack in Berlin carried out by a Tunisian asylum seeker who had allegedly expressed support for Daesh (an Arabic acronym for the terrorist group known in the West as ISIS or ISIL).

A few weeks later, yet another Russian diplomat died suddenly, this time in Athens, Greece.

Andrey Malanin, a senior diplomat at Russia’s embassy in the Greek capital, was found dead on the bathroom floor of his apartment on Jan. 9. After his body was discovered, Greek police launched an investigation into his death. Despite an initial statement that Malanin appeared to have died from natural causes at “first sight,” the investigation has yet to conclude, leaving the official cause of Malanin’s death still unestablished.

The weeks since have seen the deaths of two more Russian ambassadors.

Russia’s ambassador to India, Alexander Kadakin, died at a hospital in India on Jan. 26 following a “brief,” unspecified illness. Indian leaders mourned the death of Kadakin, who was credited with having played a significant role in promoting Indian-Russian relations, culminating in major defense and energy deals between the two nations in October of last year.

Most recently, on Feb. 20, Vitaly Churkin, Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations, died suddenly at work in New York. In its official announcement, Russia’s foreign ministry offered no details on the circumstances of Churkin’s death, instead offering condolences to his friends and relatives. Unnamed U.S. government and law enforcement officials, however, told Reuters that Churkin had apparently died of a heart attack, though the exact cause of his death remains unknown.

Churkin’s deputy, Pyotr Ilyichev, said the late diplomat “devoted his whole life to defending the interests of Russia and was found on the very front lines and in the most stressful posts.” Indeed, Churkin drew condemnation from several of his Western colleagues for his strong defense of Russia’s bombing campaign in the Syrian city of Aleppo, yet remained steadfast in his support of Moscow’s foreign policy.

Russian news agencies reported that Putin was deeply upset by the news of Churkin’s death.

The deaths of these four high-level Russian diplomats came at a time of uncertainty in U.S.-Russian relations. International attention has focused heavily on the controversial phone call between Trump’s national security advisor, retired Gen. Michael Flynn, and a Russian diplomat at Russia’s U.S. embassy, which ultimately led to Flynn’s resignation.

As the controversy surrounding Flynn consequently focused attention on the relationship between the Trump administration and the Russian government, this string of deaths came at a time when diplomatic nuance and expertise would be particularly useful.

By Whitney Webb / Republished with permission / MintPress News / Report a typo

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

* Zie: ‘Yves Chandelon, topfunctionaris NAVO onder verdachte omstandigheden gevonden na ‘suïcide……’‘

Zie ook: ‘Russische diplomaten: 9 verdachte sterfgevallen de afgelopen paar jaar………‘

en: ‘FBI beweert dat Lesin, de oprichter van RT, zichzelf heeft doodgeslagen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘

Klik voor meer berichten n.a.v. het voorgaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden, dit geldt niet voor de labels: Malanin, Kadakin, Churkin en Ilyichev.

Trumps vrede met Rusland weer van de kaart met aanstelling McMaster?

Posted on February 23, 2017 by Telmo Claro

Donald ‘het beest’ Trump liet tijdens de verkiezingen weten, dat hij de relaties met Rusland wilde verbeteren en ook na zijn verkiezing noemde hij dit nog een paar keer. Intussen blijkt dat Trump zich heeft neergelegd bij de bestaande status quo: de Koude Oorlog 2.0.

Met het aanstellen van generaal McMaster* als nationale veiligheidsadviseur, heeft Trump bevestigd, dat hij zich heeft gevoegd bij de anti-Russische oorlogshitserij in het Pentagon en bij de geheime diensten, zoals de CIA en de NSA……….

McMaster is een oorlogshitser van de eerste orde en liegt dat het gedrukt staat, o.a. over Georgië, De Krim en Oekraïne (zoals u in het artikel hieronder kan lezen).

Hier dat artikel van Anti-Media, gisteren ontvangen (lees en zie ook de artikelen/video onder de links in dat artikel):

Hopes of Peace with Russia Could Be Crushed by Trump’s New National Security Advisor

February 22, 2017 at 10:44 am

Written by Anti-Media News Desk

(RPI)** President Trump has selected Gen. H.R. McMaster to be his National Security Advisor, replacing the short-lived Gen. Michael Flynn. Those breathing a sigh of relief that the rumored favorite John Bolton didn’t get the nod may want to hold that thought — and their breath. McMaster is not the man to guide President Trump toward better relations with Russia and less US interference in the internal affairs of others.

In fact, he believes the opposite.

In a speech*** delivered at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) just last May, Gen. McMaster blamed the lack of sufficient US military presence overseas for what he calls a more aggressive Russian geostrategic posturing.

Said the General:

“Even though it may have been apparent, at least since 2008, that Russia was changing its geostrategic behavior and engaging in…probing, probing at the far reaches of American power, our strategic response was to accelerate our withdrawal of…army forces from Europe. And what we’re seeing now is we’ve awakened to obviously this threat from Russia who is waging limited war for limited objectives. Annexing Crimea. Invading Ukraine. At zero cost. And consolidating gains over that territory, and portraying the reaction by us and partners as escalatory. … What is required is forward deterrence. To be able to ratchet up the cost at the frontier.”

The General also made the completely fallacious assertion that Russia invaded Georgia in 2008. Even the highly critical if not overtly anti-Russia European Union concluded that Georgia was to blame for launching an ill-advised attack on Russian peacekeeping forces that were part of an international mission in South Ossetia.

Does this sound like someone who is going to work to help President Trump improve relations with Russia?

No wonder neocons Max Boot and Sen. John McCain are absolutely thrilled with Trump’s choice of McMaster to be National Security Advisor.

Sen. McCain, who just returned from attacking President Trump at the Munich Security Conference for not being harder on Russia, said today that McMaster:

“…knows how to succeed. I give President Trump great credit for this decision, as well as his national security cabinet choices. I could not imagine a better, more capable national security team than the one we have right now.”

Max Boot had a similar reaction:

“H.R. McMaster is one of the most impressive army officers of his generation—a rare combination of soldier and scholar.”

McMaster’s claim to fame was the 1997 Dereliction of Duty, which is billed as a brave attack on the mistake of the Vietnam war, but was in fact largely focused on the failure to devote enough resources to actually winning the war — a typical neocon critique of failed military interventions.

Is McMaster a worse choice than John Bolton? Perhaps. Whereas Bolton would have been under the microscope, McMaster may just be able, due to his military history, be able to avoid close scrutiny.
Whatever the case, McMaster is all about conflict with Russia. Will his boss keep him in check?

Whatever the case, McMaster is all about conflict with Russia. Will his boss keep him in check?

By Daniel McAdams / Republished with permission / RPI / Report a typo

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

* McMaster bedankte Trump uitvoerig voor zijn benoeming, terwijl hij vierde keus was…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

** RPI: Ron Paul Institute

*** Een toespraak op een conferentie die werd betaald door Rolls Royce Noord-Amerika………. (Rolls Royce bouwt o.a. vliegtuigmotoren…..)