Russiagate kritiek: Tulsi Gabbard (VS democratisch presidentskandidaat) gedemoniseerd door Democratische Partij en de massamedia

Naar aanleiding van een Twitterbericht dat Tulsi Gabbard de wereld instuurde en waarin zij stelt dat kortzichtige politici en hun hulp in de massamedia, de laatste 2 jaar bezig zijn geweest Trump neer te zetten als een marionet van Putin, schreef Caitlin Johnstone het hieronder opgenomen artikel…..

Van Russiagate is intussen geen spaan meer heel, zoveel is wel duidelijk uit de rapportage van Mueller (die nog steeds niet helemaal openbaar is gemaakt), waar de hysterie over ‘Russische manipulaties’ ervoor hebben gezorgd dat de nieuwe koude oorlog verder is opgetuigd, met de daarmee gepaard gaande peperdure wapenrace en inperking van de privacy, plus censuur op het internet…… Let wel die censuur en inperking van de privacy werden en worden doorgevoerd in zogenaamde westerse democratieën, terwijl dat soort maatregelen ‘thuishoren’ in een dictatuur…..

Gabbard voegde aan haar Twitterbericht toe dat Trump er alles aan heeft gedaan niet langer te worden gezien als marionet van Putin, juist door een veel harder beleid tegen Rusland te voeren, waarbij hij zelfs de kans op een kernoorlog niet uit de weg is gegaan en zo’n oorlog nog steeds niet uitsluit……
In het Twitterbericht van Gabbard is ‘geen woord Spaans’ opgenomen, bovendien een waarheid als een koe! Echter de reacties op dit bericht waren niet misselijk. Gabbard wordt figuurlijk afgemaakt door die massamedia, politici en opiniemakers van diverse rechtse denktanks……. (de laatste zijn in de VS altijd rechts, ‘maar goed..’)
Zoals gezegd: Caitlin Johnstone publiceerde op haar site het hieronder opgenomen artikel en als conclusie stelt ze dat de welgestelden niet voor niets zoveel geld steken in het beheren van de media, immers als je de media beheerst, beheers je en regisseer je het denkbeeld dat bij het volk leeft……

Plutocraten beheersen de westerse: -media, -politici en -denktanks, zij hebben belang bij de huidige inhumane neoliberale status quo, ja zelfs bij de nieuwe koude oorlog en alle andere illegale oorlogen die de VS voert, immers dit geteisem heeft veel aandelen in de wapenindustrie, waaronder ik ook de fabrikanten reken die rollend, varend en vliegend oorlogstuig produceren, een industrie die zoals je begrijpt baat heeft bij zoveel mogelijk oorlog en spanningen in de wereld……
Gezien het voorgaande kan je dan ook stellen dat elke claim vals is die de VS maakt als het weer een illegale oorlog voert, of als het een opstand dan wel coup organiseert en regisseert, de claim dat dit is om democratie te brengen en een bloedige dictator af te zetten…… In werkelijkheid heeft VS schijt aan democratie en bloedige dictators, zolang het bewuste land maar de hielen van de VS likt, VS bedrijven toelaat en in de VS grote ‘defensie orders’ plaatst…. Sterker nog: de VS steunt een aantal dictators, niet in de laatste plaats de reli-fascistische dictaturen van het Midden-Oosten…. (Saoedi-Arabië, de Verenigde Arabische Emiraten >> VAE, Egypte en buiten het Midden-Oosten: Marokko)

Intussen is bekend dat Mueller de hele Russiagate leugen heeft afgeschoten, daar er geen bewijs voor is te vinden….. Met Russiagate werd zoals gezegd niet alleen de vrijheid van meningsuiting zwaar geweld aangedaan middels censuur op het internet, maar werd ook de Koude Oorlog 2.0 opgetuigd…..

Aan het voorgaande hebben de reguliere media grote steun verleend, met een enorme berg aan fake news (nepnieuws), waarvoor deze media niet worden gestraft middels de al eerder genoemde censuur, hoewel de bewijzen daarvoor letterlijk voor het oprapen liggen…… Waar sociale media die aantoonbaar echt nieuws brengen, worden afgemaakt in die reguliere westerse media en door de westerse politiek en ze worden geblokkeerd op Facebook en Twitter……..

Responses To This Tweet Show How People Fixate On Narrative Over Fact

Go to the profile of Caitlin Johnstone
Last month I published an essay about the importance of understanding the difference between fact and narrative, and I just want to quickly highlight a perfect illustration of this importance in a controversy arising from a recent Tulsi Gabbard tweet. The tweet reads as follows:

“Short-sighted politicians & media pundits who’ve spent last 2 years accusing Trump as a Putin puppet have brought us the expensive new Cold War & arms race. How? Because Trump now does everything he can to prove he’s not Putin’s puppet—even if it brings us closer to nuclear war.”

Now, all the facts say that Gabbard’s claim that Trump has been bringing the world closer to nuclear war with Russia is indisputably true. It is perhaps possible to dispute the notion that Trump has escalated tensions with Russia to try and “prove he’s not Putin’s puppet”; maybe an argument could be made that he’s simply reckless and violent or that he’s particularly beholden to cold war profiteers, or that despite all his rhetoric he just really, really hates Russia for some reason. But it is absolutely not disputable that Trump has greatly escalated tensions with a nuclear superpower by implementing a Nuclear Posture

Review with a much more aggressive stance against Russia, withdrawing from the INF treaty, bombing and illegally occupying Syria, arming Ukraine, staging a coup in Venezuela, and many, many other hawkish actions taken against the interests of the Russian Federation which his predecessor Obama never dared to take.
These facts are all well documented in the mainstream press and are entirely beyond dispute. The facts say that Donald Trump has escalated nuclear tensions with Russia more than any other president since the fall of the Berlin Wall. But if you go to Gabbard’s tweet and read the responses right now, you’ll find thousands and thousands of
Democratic establishment loyalists calling her a liar for saying so.
“Gabbard staking out a bold ‘Trump is *too* tough on Putin’ lane in the Democratic primary,” tweeted former NSA attorney Susan Hennessey of CNN and the Brookings Institution. “As predictable as it is absurd.”
“Tulsi Gabbard’s is the only Twitter account other than Trump’s that I routinely have to check to make sure it’s actually hers, because the tweet is so absurdly ridiculous,” tweeted #Resistance pundit John Aravosis. “Now she’s defending Trump on Russia. Why is she a Democrat? And she’s actually using Kremlin talking points (nuclear war!). Unbelievable.”
“Tulsi, you aren’t the first American politician to cozy up to foreign dictators and to serve as a Putin mouthpiece,” tweeted former CIA officer Evan McMullin. “While you, Putin and Trump fear monger about nuclear war, we’ll protect our democracy and hold corrupted politicians accountable.”


There are many, many more, but you get the picture. The deluge of responses to Gabbard’s undeniably true statement about Trump’s dangerous escalations against a nuclear superpower are largely predicated on two assumptions: (1) that Trump has not in fact made the escalations that he has made, and (2) that the danger of nuclear war is not a real or significant thing. These are both, obviously, bat shit insane.

The primary risk of nuclear war is not that one will be planned out and deliberately started in an attempt to win, but that a warhead will be deployed amid the chaos of escalating tensions as a result of miscommunication, misunderstanding or technical failure, as nearly happened on more than one occasion during the last cold war. Once one nuclear weapon has been deployed in an already tense situation, it’s unlikely that the full arsenals of both sides won’t be unleashed upon each other. As journalist Glenn Greenwald pointed out in response to the uproar over Gabbard’s tweet, “The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists’ doomsday clock is at 2 minutes before midnight. By far its two greatest threats to *humanity’s existence* are climate change & US/Russia nuclear war. Yes, how crazy and treasonous to want to avoid ratcheting up tensions.”
The US and Russia are by an immensely wide margin the two biggest nuclear powers on the planet, which makes for a lot of small, unpredictable moving parts with mounting tensions steadily increasing the probability of something going catastrophically wrong.

Dismissing a congresswoman’s attempt to point at this potentially world-ending risk as a “Kremlin talking point” is about the stupidest, craziest thing that a human brain could possibly come up with.
And yet here we are.

There are still more than 14,000 nuclear weapons left on the planet. Join us in reducing and eliminating nuclear threats today https://www.ploughshares.org/world-nuclear-stockpile-report

World Nuclear Weapon Stockpile

Twenty-nine years after the end of the Cold War, the world’s combined stockpiles of nuclear weapons remain at unacceptably high levels.

ploughshares.org


So what’s up with that? Why is an indisputably true claim about an indisputably real danger being treated as a lie by Democratic Party loyalists, even though it attacks the same president they themselves claim to oppose?
The answer is because it doesn’t fit the narrative. A consensus has been built over the last two years that Trump is a Kremlin puppet, so the indisputable fact that his administration is endangering the life of every organism on this planet by escalating tensions with Russia looks like a lie against that backdrop. The facts say one thing, the narrative says another, and they go with the narrative. For most people, narrative takes precedence over fact.
And what’s interesting is that these same facts could have remained exactly as they are and allowed the exact opposite narrative to be constructed. If her plutocratic owners had wished it, Rachel Maddow would have spent every night over the last two years warning everyone that Donald Trump is taking dangerous actions against Russia that threaten to wipe all life off the face of the earth, and it would have worked. If Trump had continued making these escalations in our hypothetical alternate timeline while the mass media was constantly selling the “Trump’s going to get us all killed in a nuclear war with Russia” narrative, all the same blue-checkmarked Twitter pundits you see yelling at Tulsi Gabbard today would be yelling about the dangers of nuclear war in our alternate timeline.
Narrative really is that powerful. You see it in the behavior of social media users, you see it in the behavior of governments, you see it in religions, and you see it in abusive relationships which continue because of the narrative “He’s a good guy underneath it all and he really loves me” even though the facts say “He beats you and cheats on you all the time.” If you can control the stories that people tell themselves about a given situation, then you control those people on all matters pertaining to that situation. Regardless of facts.
Which is why the plutocratic class funnels so much money into buying up media influence, funding think tanks, and other means of narrative control: if you can control the narrative, no amount of facts will deter the mainstream public from going along with your agendas. This is why the behaviors of governments so consistently move in alignment with the interests of this same media-buying, think tank-funding, politician-owning plutocratic class. Whoever controls the narrative controls the world.
_________________________
Thanks for reading! My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish.
Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2
Caitlin Johnstone | March 18, 2019 at 10:50 pm | Tags: #Trump, cold war, Politics, Russia, Tulsi Gabbard, tweet | Categories: Article |

URL: https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1Bd
==================================
Zie wat betreft de Nederlandse valse profeet van Russiagate, D66 leeghoofd Ollongren:
Kasja Ollongren (D66 minister) en de Russische manipulatie van de Provinciale Statenverkiezingen

Kajsa Ollongren (D66 vicepremier): Nederland staat in het vizier van Russische inlichtingendiensten……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Ollongren (D66 minister) schiet een levensgrote bok met fake news show

Ollongren gesteund door Thomas Boesgaard (AD), ‘Rusland verpakt het nepnieuws gekoppeld aan echt nieuws…..’ Oei!!

Zie verder:
Russiagate gelovigen krijgen nieuwe klap: WikiLeaks kreeg de DNC mails van een klokkenluider, niet van Rusland…..‘ (zie ook de links naar de ‘jongste berichten’ over ‘Russische manipulatie’ in dat bericht)

Russiagate: de westerse massamedia gebruiken propaganda om het volk te manipuleren, precies waar ze Rusland van beschuldigen

BBC: Rusland ‘misbruikt humor’ om Russiagate te ontkrachten….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Uitgelekte telefoongesprekken tussen Trump en Putin bewijzen dat ‘Russiagaters gelijk hebben……’

WikiLeaks belooft The Guardian 1 miljoen dollar als het haar leugens i.z. Assange en Russiagate kan bewijzen…….

The Guardian: ondanks een enorme misser (fake news) gaat men door met de valse beschuldigingen t.a.v. Assange……

Russiagate? Britaingate zal je bedoelen!

Facebook gebruikte ‘fake news’ beschuldiging om de aandacht voor schandalen af te leiden

New York Times: eerste Israëlische inval in Gazastrook sinds 2014 >> fake news!

Noord-Koreaans ‘bedrog met nucleaire deal’ is fake news o.a. gebracht door de New York Times

‘Fake News’ misbruikt door dictaturen en de reguliere (massa-) media

Twitter weert waarheid: Paul Craig Roberts in de ban, Roberts >> de grote criticus van de illegale oorlogen die de VS voert

Politico rapport bevestigt: Russiagate is een hoax‘ (Russiagate, de enorme leugen op basis waaraan we de huidige censuurgolf te danken hebben……)

Russiagate sprookje ondermijnt VS democratie en de midterm verkiezingen‘ (zie ook de links in dat bericht)

De Israëlische manipulatie van de VS presidentsverkiezingen, gaat veel verder dan wat men Rusland in de schoenen schuift…..

‘Russiagate’: Intel-raport over Russische bemoeienis met verkiezingen opgebouwd met leugens en is politiek gemotiveerd, aldus Matlock, voormalig VS ambassadeur in Moskou

The Attack on ‘Fake News’ Is Really an Attack on Alternative Media

The Lie of the 21st Century: How Mainstream Media “Fake News” Led to the U.S. Invasion of Iraq

FBI, de spin in het Russiagate web……..

Mocking Trump Doesn’t Prove Russia’s Guilt

CIA deed zich voor als het Russische Kaspersky Lab, aldus Wikileaks Vault 8…..

WikiLeaks: Seth Rich Leaked Clinton Emails, Not Russia

Hillary Clinton en haar oorlog tegen de waarheid…….. Ofwel een potje Rusland en Assange schoppen!

Murray, ex-ambassadeur van GB: de Russen hebben de VS verkiezingen niet gemanipuleerd

‘Russische manipulaties uitgevoerd’ door later vermoord staflid Clintons campagneteam Seth Rich……… AIVD en MIVD moeten hiervan weten!!

Obama gaf toe dat de DNC e-mails expres door de DNC werden gelekt naar Wikileaks….!!!!

VS ‘democratie’ aan het werk, een onthutsende en uitermate humoristische video!

Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump

Hillary Clinton moet op de hoogte zijn geweest van aankoop Steele dossier over Trump……..

Flashback: Clinton Allies Met With Ukrainian Govt Officials to Dig up Dirt on Trump During 2016 Election

FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information

Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election

Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media

CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..

‘Russiagate’ een complot van CIA, FBI, Hillary Clinton en het DNC………..

‘Russiagate’ een verhaal van a t/m z westers ‘fake news…..’

Campagne Clinton, smeriger dan gedacht…………‘ (met daarin daarin opgenomen de volgende artikelen: ‘Donna Brazile Bombshell: ‘Proof’ Hillary ‘Rigged’ Primary Against Bernie‘ en ‘Democrats in Denial After Donna Brazile Says Primary Was Rigged for Hillary‘)

Clinton te kakken gezet: Brazile (Democratische Partij VS) draagt haar boek op aan Seth Rich, het vermoorde lid van DNC die belastende documenten lekte

RT America één van de eerste slachtoffers in een heksenjacht op westerse alternatieve media en nadenkend links……

Rusland zou onafhankelijkheid Californië willen uitlokken met reclame voor borsjt…….

Alarm Code Geel: Lara Rense (NOS) voedt Rusland-haat

Mediaorgaan Sinclair dwingt ‘TV ankers’ propaganda op te lezen (Sinclair bedient rond de 70% van de VS bevolking van ‘lokaal nieuws’)

Ex-CIA agent legt uit hoe de VS schaduwregering en deep state werken, ofwel de machinaties achter de schermen……

‘Russiagate’ een nieuwe ongelooflijke aanklacht van de Democraten…….

VS demoniseert Russiagate critici als Jill Stein…..

De Russiagate samenzweringstheorie dient de machthebbers………

Britse en VS manipulaties van verkiezingen en stimulatie van conflicten middels psychologische oorlogsvoering‘ (voor VS manipulaties van verkiezingen elders, liggen er ‘metersdikke’ dossiers, o.a. in te zien op WikeLeaks)

AIPAC, een pro-Israël lobbygroep, koopt leden van het VS congres om met 4 miljoen dollar per jaar

Ilhan Omar en Rashida Tlaib* zijn de eerste vrouwelijke moslim leden van het VS congres en deze 2 timmeren nogal aan de weg. Zo heeft Omar een berg stront over zich heen gekregen voor het openbaren van het feit dat AIPAC, een pro-Israëlische lobbygroep, ieder jaar weer congresleden omkoopt met 4 miljoen dollar voor politici die ‘de goede zaak’ dienen, ofwel die zonder enige kritiek pal staan voor de fascistische apartheidsstaat Israël en alle enorme oorlogsmisdaden (om niet te zeggen misdaden tegen de menselijkheid) die dit gestolen land begaat tegen de Palestijnen…..
Het gaat overigens niet alleen om het pal staan voor Israël, maar ook elke kritiek die op deze terreurstaat wordt geuit afdoen als antisemitisme, behoort tot de taak van deze omgekochte congresleden en dat heeft Omar gemerkt zoals je al kon lezen. Het feit dat Omar kritiek durft te hebben op AIPAC is al reden genoeg om haar als antisemiet weg te zetten……
De schrijver van dit artikel is Alexander Rubinstein en werd eerder gepubliceerd op MintPress News, door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media. Verbaas je zoals ik over de hysterische manier waarop men in de VS elke komma kritiek op Israël afdoet als antisemitisch, datzelfde geldt overigens voor alle westerse landen, neem de kritiek op Jeremy Corbyn, Labour en oppositieleider in GB….**

Laten we hopen dat Omar en Tlaib zich uiteindelijk niet de mond laten snoeren, de invloed van Israël op de politiek in de VS is ongeëvenaard en zelfs al zou het Russiagate sprookje waar zijn (wat het niet is), zou die beïnvloeding niet in de schaduw kunnen staan van de enorme invloed die Israël heeft op de politiek in de VS…… Zo sprak de zwaar corrupte oorlogsmisdadiger Netanyahu in 2015 het VS congres toe, waar hij de richting wilde bepalen van de politiek die de leden zouden moeten volgen inzake Iran, dit daar hij het niet eens was met Obama…) Daarmee schoffeerde deze Palestijnenslachter niet alleen Obama, maar schopte hij zelfs tegen het kleine beetje democratie dat nog over is in de VS…..

Ilhan Omar is Right: AIPAC Influences Congress With $4 Million Every Year

February 11, 2019 at 10:04 pm
(MPN) — What unites Republicans and Democrats, a former Jewish terrorist, the Republican leader in the House of Representatives, Nikki Haley, Chelsea Clinton and Liz Cheney? A Muslim lady with a mouth and some opinions, apparently. Muslim Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) has been the subject of bipartisan bullying that has reached a fever pitch since the lawmaker explicitly called out the number one Israeli lobby group in the U.S. — the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Earlier this year, Omar made heads explode in the halls of power after she denounced the U.S.-backed coup attempt in Venezuela. Now, even the leader of her own party in her own chamber of Congress – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi – is joining a chorus of detractors accusing Omar of anti-Semitism for correctly characterizing the business of lobbying.
While this is not the first time that Omar has come under fire for criticizing Israel, the current saga began on Sunday when journalist Glenn Greenwald tweeted an article by the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz that trumpeted calls from House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) to “take action” against Omar and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI). McCarthy did not specify which statements he opposed, but called the situation “equal” or worse than that of Rep. Steve King (R-IA) who was removed from his committee assignments by his party after he questioned when “white supremacy” had become “offensive.”
Tlaib and Omar are the first two Muslim women in Congress, while Tlaib is the first Palestinian-American. Both have supported the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, a nonviolent campaign to economically pressure Israel into compliance with international and humanitarian law.

Equating @IlhanMN & @RashidaTlaib‘s criticism of Israel to Steve King’s long defense of white supremacy is obscene (McCarthy said it’s worse). In the US, we’re allowed to criticize our own government: certainly foreign governments. The GOP House Leader’s priorities are warped.

Sorry, but you’re not going to turn the two first Muslim women to serve in the US Congress into overnight Jew-haters because of their criticisms of Israel. What’s actually anti-Semitic is conflating the Government of Israel with Jews, so those of you doing that should stop.

MintPress News has previously covered dubious accusations of anti-Semitism against Tlaib after she took a stand against a free-speech-crushing bill favored by — you guessed it — the Israel lobby. Meanwhile, other lawmakers are attempting to block Tlaib’s planned delegation to the illegally occupied West Bank.
In response to the attack from the Republican House leader, ACLU Human Rights Director Jamil Dakwar quipped that Congressman McCarthy may “want to revive McCarthyism.”
McCarthy himself received $33,000 from NorPAC, “an AIPAC affiliate, in the last election cycle,” reportedthe online publication Jewish Worker. Meanwhile, McCarthy himself has been accused of spreading anti-Semitic tropes, warning that three Jewish, liberal mega-donors, including George Soros, were trying to “buy” the midterm elections, which were to take place the following day. That tweet has since been deleted.

One of my greatest honors is leading new members on a bipartisan trip to Israel to showcase the shared values and unbreakable bond between our countries.

Anti-Semitic tropes have no place in the halls of Congress. It is dangerous for Democrat leadership to stay silent on this reckless language.

Anti-Semitic tropes have no place in the halls of Congress. It is dangerous for Democrat leadership to stay silent on this reckless language.

Weird you would tie trips to Israel with antisemitism. Equating Zionism to Judaism is antisemitic. Almost like you are a disingenuous weasel

About the Benjamins
Upon seeing the report, Omar did not pull any punches. In an apparent pun on a slang term for $100 bills and the prime minister of Israel’s first name, she tweeted that “it’s all about the Benjamins baby,” which is a quote from a 1990’s Puff Daddy song.
Then, an opinion editor at the Jewish magazine The Forward, Batya Ungar-Sargon, reposted the tweet, telling her followers that she’d “love to know who Ilhan Omar thinks is paying American politicians to be pro-Israel, though I think I can guess.”

In 2018 spent ~ $4 Million lobbying our elected officials to support Israel, including quashing Americans first amend right to support BDS.@IlhanMN pointing out how Congress is bought to represent a foreign government over Americans isn’t antisemitic it’s stating facts.

Omar clapped back with just six characters, tweeting “AIPAC!” — the acronym for the largest and most powerful pro-Israel lobby group in the United States. In fact, AIPAC spends more than $3.5 million every year to influence Congress to be more favorable towards Israel.
This is a disgusting. By the same token one can say “The Forward has won the approval of the KKK.”

Ungar-Sargon then attempted to speak on behalf of all American Jews, responding to Omar that she should “learn how to talk about Jews in a non-anti-Semitic way.” Anti-Zionist American Jews promptly shut her down in replies.
I know she’s still a Democrat and you should never put too much faith in anyone who’s a member of the Democratic Party, but I like Ilhan Omar. She’s had the balls to stand against the Washington consensus on Israel and on regime change in Venezuela. I’m glad she’s in the House.

89 people are talking about this
But some powerful people with Twitter accounts took exception the the congresswoman’s identification of a pro-Israel lobby group as an entity that “is paying American politicians to be pro-Israel.” One is left to wonder what causes AIPAC doles out the contents of its propaganda war-chest for if not to influence lawmakers on Israel. The takeaway from this line of analysis is that money has no influence in politics, which is patently absurd.
Yet AIPAC’s own mission statement claims “AIPAC urges all members of Congress to support Israel through foreign aid, government partnerships, joint anti-terrorism efforts.”
Kudos to @IlhanMN for calling out the role of the GOP’s donors in influencing US foreign policy.

The GOP’s biggest donors, the Adelsons, are hawkishly pro-Israel and advocate using nukes on Iran!

The GOP’s biggest fundraiser, Norm Coleman, is a paid lobbyist for Saudi Arabia!

Here, those that charge Omar with anti-Semitism reveal their own. By leveling charges of bigotry against critics of the Israel lobby, Israel’s defenders equate Jewishness with allegiance to Israel, or Zionism. In keeping with this estimation, Jews that do not condone the apartheid project underway in Palestine are branded “self-hating.”
Here is Chelsea Clinton accusing Ilhan Omar of anti-semitism for critiquing AIPAC. You hear that? Being anti-AIPAC is now anti-semitism.

Despite Rep. Omar’s statement about AIPAC being self-evident, the remark riled the likes of former Trump Administration Ambassador to the UN and pro- Israel Nikki Haley, who once said, “When I come to AIPAC, I am with friends.” Haley’s pro-Israel track record at the international body prompted an Israeli cartoonist to satirize her departure with an image of a United Nations handyman telling Haley, who is packing her bags, that she forgot her “second flag” — an Israeli one. Israeli President Reuven Rivlin even called Haley a “true ambassador” for Israel.
To see this at the UN was a fight every day. This CANNOT be tolerated in our own Congress by anyone of either party. In a time of increased anti semitism, we all must be held to account. No excuses. ❤️🇺🇸

A major Washington pile-on
Lawmakers who pounced on Omar include: Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA), Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Rep. Max Rose (D-NY), Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL), Rep. Sean Maloney (D-NY), Rep. Donna Shalala (D-FL), Rep. Anthony Brindisi (D-NY), Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY), Sen. Krysten Sinema (D-AZ), Rep. Lois Frankel (D-FL), Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA), Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ), Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Rep. Elaine Luria (D-VA), who are trying to shore up support for a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) hailing Israel as a “proud and stable democracy with robust protections for minorities” and calling for “swift action” to address the “recent rhetoric.”
Pelosi responded hours later with a joint statement with House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC), Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Rep. Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), and Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA) “condemning anti-Semitic comments made over Twitter by Congresswoman Ilhan Omar.”
Also included in the D.C. dogpiling were the Republican Jewish Coalition, the American Jewish Committee (which painted AIPAC as a “Jewish” organization), and Dov Hikind, whom journalist Dan Cohen pointed out is a former member of the Jewish Defense League terrorist organization. Bill and Hillary Clinton’s daughter Chelsea also “co-signed” Ungar-Sargon’s smears of Omar’s rhetoric as “anti-Semitic.”
In all seriousness though I am a young Jew who has never more represented on this issue than seeing @IlhanMN be brave enough to call out AIPAC and the Israel Lobby in its efforts to cement anti-Palestinian racism as a litmus test for Congress. She speaks for me, they don’t.

Chelsea Clinton assured several on Twitter that she would “reach out to Omar.” When Omar agreed, saying “we must call out smears from the GOP and their allies,” Clinton agreed. That was until Ashley Goldberg stepped in, tweeting that Clinton “outright said there is a problem with antisemitism [sic] on both sides and Ilhan Omar clearly said she only cares about what she can do to depict it as only a problem with the GOP.”
Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton have earned over $3.5 million in paid speeches to pro-Israeli apartheid groups. At a $1000 a plate dinner, Bill Clinton said he would “grab a rifle and get in the trench and fight and die” for Israel. https://www.alternet.org/2016/02/clintons-earned-over-35-million-paid-addresses-pro-israel-organizations/amp/

But the conversation took a turn, culminating in Clinton’s vowing to “google people” before engaging with them from then on out, after journalist Hannah Gais pointed out that Goldberg was photographed at a white supremacist conference in 2016 hosted by Richard Spencer. Goldberg, an anti-communist Jewish media personality, also used to date Neo-Nazi leader Matthew Heimbach, the founder of the now-defunct Traditionalist Workers Party.
Yes but Omar did not talk about Jews, she talked about money and it’s influence on American policy on Israel. What does it say about her accusers that any mention of money and power=Jews?

AIPAC’s non-influence in Congress”
Not everyone bought it hook-line-and-sinker, however. Khaled Elgindy, a senior fellow at the neoconservative Brookings Institution, tweeted that he was “in the market for a bridge,” and asked The Forward editor Ungar-Sargon to “please enlighten us on AIPAC’s non-influence in Congress.”
A spokesperson for Omar told Politico in response to the firestorm caused by the representative’s
tweets that the remarks “speak for themselves.”

She has consistently handled it with grace, even in the face of overt racism from GOP congressmen (which has somehow never been a scandal). What she gets in return is “serious reporters” parroting the smears.

Things that are vastly more antisemitic than Ilhan Omar’s tweets:
– The belief that AIPAC represents American Jews
– The belief that Israel represents American Jews
– The median American Christian Zionist’s views on Jews
– The president
– All 7 of the Harry Potter Novels

But a cursory examination of the legacy AIPAC has left since it opened shop the DC speak even greater volumes. The lobby group is not itself run by Israel, allowing it to avoid registration under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, a law that forces foreign lobby groups to be more transparent. That’s because I.L. Kenen, the founder of AIPAC, created a “legal loophole by which AIPAC is defined not as a lobby for a foreign state but for Americans who support that state. It’s a critical distinction that makes AIPAC’s dominance over U.S. Middle East policy possible,” according to former AIPAC employee M.J. Rosenberg.
AIPAC continues its practice of using loopholes to further its agenda today. A recent documentaryproduced by Al Jazeera but censored by Qatar, which funds the outlet, showed how one fundraiser for a congressional candidate, organized by an unofficial “AIPAC group,” circumvented laws on maximum individual political contributions by pooling donors’ grants together and doling out the official donations evenly among participants.
And the organization’s sway over Congress is difficult to dispute. Promotional literature for the annual AIPAC policy conference in Washington has touted the idea that it would be “attended by more members of Congress than almost any other event.” Steve Rosen, a former AIPAC executive, would tell people that he “could take out a napkin at any Senate hangout and get signatures of support for one issue or another from scores of senators,” according to Connie Bruck in The New Yorker.
As AIPAC’s former policy director, Rosen and “Iran specialist” at AIPAC Keith Weissman met with Larry Franklin, a top Pentagon analyst working on Iran, prior to Franklin leaking a draft presidential directive “that proposed a tougher policy on Iran, which included consideration of covert action towards regime change,” according to Democracy Now. That document made its way into AIPAC’s hands, which passed it on to Israeli officials.
Former AIPAC President David Steiner was even forced to resign after audio was leaked of him bragging about how he was negotiating with Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign to appoint people to key posts in his administration. Steiner ultimately recanted and apologized to both AIPAC and Bill Clinton.
====================================
Nogmaals: dan te bedenken dat men Rusland op valse gronden beschuldigt van inmenging in de VS politiek….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!
* Ilhan Omar, heeft sinds 2017 een zetel in het lagerhuis van Minnesota voor de Minnesota Demcratic-Farmer-Labor Party. Rashida Tlaib is van de Democratische Partij voor wie zij de vertegenwoordiger is van het 13de (congressionele) district van Michigan. (toevoeging ter verduidelijking gemaakt op 10 maart 2019)

Ignorethe mainstream media, Jeremy Corbyn just played a winning move.

Volkskrant nepnieuws weersproken: geen bewijs voor Russische hacks en manipulaties! NSA klokkenluider gepakt na ‘fout’ van The Intercept……..

Een behoorlijk stinkende zaak mensen, Reality Leigh Winner, een ‘contractor’ voor de NSA heeft geheime documenten gelekt over een ‘Russische cyberaanval en Russische vispogingen (‘phishing’) in e-mails aan lokale VS verkiezingsbeambten’.

De reguliere mediaorganen in binnen en (westers) buitenland slaan zich op de knieën van pret, als zou nu dan toch eindelijk het bewijs boven tafel zijn gekomen, de ‘smoking gun’ zo u wilt, dat Rusland de VS verkiezingen heeft gemanipuleerd……

Volgens The Intercept, die de gelekte documenten ontving, blijkt uit de documenten dat er ‘vanuit Rusland’ minstens één grote cybveraanval is uitgevoerd, en zouden er kort voor de presidentsverkiezingen in de VS, meer dan 100 Russische ‘phishing emails’ zijn verzonden naar lokale verkiezingsbeambten………

Echter in de documenten die vrijgekomen zijn, wordt niet eens gesproken over een cyberaanval tegen de VS, er is alleen informatie vergaard (wat je ‘spionage’ zou kunnen noemen), er is nooit een gevaar geweest voor bepaalde accounts en ook zijn de verkiezingen in de VS nooit in gevaar gekomen…… Voorts wordt erop gewezen, dat de cyberspionage (daar zou zoals eerder gesteld, wel sprake van zijn ) werd gedaan met technieken, die niet worden gebruikt door het Russische leger, die als dader werd en wordt aangewezen door de geheime diensten in de VS……

Weer blijkt dat de VS geen greintje bewijs heeft voor Russische inmenging bij de verkiezingen

Eén ding is zeker, The Intercept heeft (weer) een uiterst dubieuze rol gespeeld, de klokkenluider had nooit bekend mogen worden. Ik vraag me af, of er niet ‘een beetje opzet in het spel is’, gezien de reacties in de westerse pers……….

Lees het volgende artikel van Anti-Media, waarin ook de smerige rol ter sprake komt van The Intercept en oordeel zelf:

The Intercept Has A Source Burning Problem

June 8, 2017 at 9:07 am
Written by Whitney Webb
(MPN) Long having built its reputation on reports derived from classified information provided to them by leakers, The Intercept now finds itself in the unpleasant position of having burned – or outed – one of its anonymous sources.
The leaker, Reality Leigh Winner, allegedly gave The Intercept classified NSA documents pertaining to an investigation of Russian military intelligence hacking within the U.S. and now faces years in prison under the Espionage Act. While outing Winner could have been the result of negligence, the FBI affidavit explaining why the bureau arrested Winner shows it went beyond mere negligence.
According to FBI documents, a reporter at the paper sent the leaked documents to a contractor working for the National Security Agency (NSA) – the very agency they had been taken from – a full week before The Intercept published the story. The alleged intention was to let the NSA itself verify the documents, an unusual move for a news outlet that was originally intended to have exclusive publication rights over the Snowden leaks that exposed NSA surveillance. Upon being contacted, the NSA asked that The Intercept redact parts of the document and The Intercept complied with some of those requests.
The FBI warrant also notes that the reporter in question – who is unnamed in the document – contacted a government contractor with whom he had a prior relationship and revealed where the documents had been postmarked from – Winner’s home of Augusta, Georgia – along with Winner’s work location. He also sent unedited images of the documents that contained security markings that allowed the document to be traced to Winner.
While the reporter’s identity remains unknown, the published report has four authors – two of whom have been known to burn sources before. Journalists Richard Esposito and Matthew Cole once found themselves involved in a case against CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou. Kiriakou specifically singled out Cole as having not only misled him, but having played a likely role in incriminating him. Kiriakou spent nearly two years in prison for exposing the CIA’s torture program.
.@theintercept should be ashamed of itself. Matthew Cole burns yet another source. It makes your entire organization untrustworthy.
WikiLeaks, a publishing organization committed to transparency that maintains the confidentiality of its sources, has sharply condemned The Intercept’s role in Winner’s arrest. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange wrote that “If the FBI affidavit is accurate, the reporter concerned must be named, shamed and fired by whomever they work for to maintain industry standards.” “Source-burning reporters are a menace,” he continued. “They chill trust in all journalists, which impedes public understanding.”
WikiLeaks is now offering a $10,000 reward for information “leading to the public exposure & termination” of the responsible reporter.
WikiLeaks issues a US$10,000 reward for information leading to the public exposure & termination of this ‘reporter’: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/871924646148534273
While the FBI’s allegations against Winner have been made public through the release of an affidavit and search warrant, which were unsealed at the government’s request, it is important to keep in mind that these documents contain unproven assertions and speculation designed to serve the government’s agenda and as such warrant skepticism. Winner faces allegations that have not been proven. The same is true of the FBI’s claims about how it came to arrest Winner.”
The paper’s most prominent journalist, Glenn Greenwald, has distanced himself from the article and claimed that he does not edit the paper – even though his bio lists him as a “founding co-editor.”
@ggreenwald the article in question relied heavily on that exact fallacy to generate publicity. big fan of yours since 04, but this is very troubling.

@gnocchiwizard I didn’t write the article, & I don’t edit the Intercept. I don’t control other journalists. My views on it are here https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/871832554604818432

The Intercept’s corporate dark side

This latest debacle for The Intercept may be proving the organization’s long-time critics right. The short history of the publication shows that it was hardly set up to serve the public interest. The paper was founded by Pierre Omidyar, a billionaire and major owner of both eBay and PayPal, who gave the project more than $50 million in seed money.
This alone should have been enough to complicate its mission “to hold the most powerful governmental and corporate factions accountable.”
Its first hires were Glenn Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill, and Laura Poitras – all of whom were involved in publishing the Snowden revelations, as well as other leaks. Greenwald and Poitras were the only journalists with the full Snowden cache and those secrets now belong to a single billionaire running a for-profit media company.
Omidyar’s connections to the U.S. political establishment are numerous and concerning. One of his foundation’s microcredit projects to “help” farmers in India led to an epidemic of farmer suicides that gained international headlines, as farmers became unable to pay the foundation back. His network has also funded regime change operations with USAID, most recently in Ukraine. In addition, Omidyar was well-connected to the Obama White House, which stood to lose the most from the mass publication of the Snowden cache. One of Omidyar’s main companies, PayPal, is said to be implicated in some of the NSA documents that have still been withheld.
Omidyar’s influence on The Intercept has also been established. Former Intercept writer Ken Silverstein wrote that, at the paper, “a cult of personality existed around him [Omidyar] internally that disrupted the whole organization” and that “the company’s culture centered on Omidyar.”
This background makes it less surprising that The Intercept has been caught publishing partisan stories that back U.S. establishment objectives, such as articles supporting U.S.-led regime change efforts in Syria and the very piece that outed Winner.

Outing a source only to perpetuate the “Russian hacker” narrative

The Intercept piece at the center of the controversy is particularly troubling. Titled “Top-Secret NSA Report Details Russian Hacking Effort Days Before 2016 Election,” it asserts that “Russian military intelligence executed a cyberattack on at least one U.S. voting software supplier and sent spear-phishing emails to more than 100 local election officials just days before last November’s presidential election, according to a highly classified intelligence report obtained by The Intercept.”
However, the NSA report that The Intercept published in tandem with the article provides no evidence for that claim, as it does not even mention of a cyberattack by “cyber espionage operations,” indicating that no one was attacked and only that information was collected. It also presents no proof that any accounts were compromised, nor were the U.S. elections. Even worse is that the document itself states that techniques were used by this cyber espionage actor that distinguish it from known Russian military intelligence operations, meaning the act in question may not have been carried out by Russian intelligence.
In addition, the piece quotes cyber security expert Bruce Schneier. However, Schneier is a well-known Clinton supporter and argued that Russia hacked the Democrats as far back as last July, a claim for which there is still no evidence. The Intercept piece fails to mention this aspect of Schneier’s background.
Essentially, The Intercept piece – which could lead to hard prison time for one very unfortunate whistleblower – does not accurately interpret the classified information at its core and instead seeks to propagate the “Russian hacker” narrative still being peddled by the parts of the U.S. establishment that are still bitter over Hillary Clinton’s loss. Given Omidyar’s cozy ties with the Obama White House and the left-leaning slant of The Intercept’s current editor Betsy Reed, this could be more than coincidence.
While The Intercept is now making headlines for outing a source, the bigger message is that the paper has revealed itself as being part of the system of establishment journalism it purports to stand against.
By Whitney Webb / Republished with permission / MintPress News / Report a typo

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

Zie ook: ‘Arrestatie in VS voor lekken van inlichtingen naar de media‘, een artikel van de NOS, waarin wordt gesteld dat Glenn Greenwald één van de oprichters is, van The Intercept, dat is echter niet waar. Als u het artikel van Anti-Media hebt gelezen, zal het u opvallen dat het NOS artikel behoorlijk rammelt en concludeert dat er inderdaad Russische hacks en manipulaties hebben plaatsgevonden, waar nog wel wordt gesteld, dat dit verder geen invloed heeft gehad

Veel verder gaat de Volkskrant (die de ‘smoking gun al lang geleden vond’), in dit flutblad dat in het (recente) verleden al een gigantisch aantal nepnieuwsberichten heeft gepubliceerd, durfde Michael Persson op 6 juni jl. het volgende te zeggen:

Het aan The Intercept gelekte document is een gedetailleerd schema van een aanval van Russische hackers op Amerikaanse fabrikanten van stemcomputers. De Amerikaanse inlichtingendienst NSA concludeert, zo valt te lezen, dat de Russische militaire inlichtingendienst GROe achter de phishingoperatie zat.

Dat is nieuw: de Russische aanvallen op de electorale infrastructuur waren bekend, maar de conclusie dat ook dit een door het Kremlin gecoördineerde actie was is nog niet eerder (openbaar) getrokken. Overigens is er is nog steeds geen aanwijzing dat die infiltratiepogingen effect hebben gehad op de verkiezingsuitslag.

Ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! De eerdere claims van Russische bemoeienis (‘de Russische aanvallen op de electorale infrastructuur waren bekend’), waar geen flinter bewijs voor werd geleverd, zijn voor de Volkskrant en ‘journalist’ Persson feiten, waar de documenten die nu gelekt zijn aan worden toegevoegd als bevestiging……. Dit terwijl de documenten die naar The Intercept werden gelekt, volkomen fout worden uitgelegd door de Volkskrant en in feite het tegenovergestelde bewijzen……… Gelukkig stelt ook Persson, dat de zogenaamde Russische hacks geen invloed hebben gehad op de verkiezingen……. Hier de link naar het volledige Volkskrant artikel van Michael Persson.

Vreemd dat de westerse reguliere media niet massaal met grote koppen komen, waarin wordt gesteld, dat de (zogenaamde) Russische hacks geen invloed hebben gehad op de VS presidentsverkiezingen. Immers dit werd en wordt nog steeds wel volgehouden door diezelfde media (waar de Volkskrant wel een heel vreemde draai maakt, zoals u kon lezen). Ach ja, als je dergelijke zaken eerder prominent als (nep-) nieuws bracht, ga je dat natuurlijk niet op de voorpagina onderuit halen……….

Lees wat betreft de VS, de vereniging van terreurstaten, die werkelijk alles en iedereen hacken en manipuleren, plus eerdere maffe uitlatingen van Persson: ‘VS luisterde 1,8 miljoen Nederlandse telefoongesprekken af

Mijn excuus voor de belabberde vormgeving.

VS drone aanvallen, ofwel standrechtelijke executies (moord) onder Trump met meer dan 400% gestegen………

De VS aanvallen met drones, onder president Obama verworden tot bijna dagelijkse praktijk, zijn onder, de korte tijd dat het beest Trump aan het bewind is, met 432% gestegen, zo berichtte Anti-Media gisteren.

Nobelprijs voor de Vrede winnaar Obama voerde al 10 keer meer drone aanvallen uit, dan onder president George W. Bush werden uitgevoerd, dezelfde Bush die e.e.a. introduceerde……..

Uit onderzoek is duidelijk geworden dat meer dan 90% van de slachtoffers die bij deze aanvallen worden vermoord, omstanders zijn, die niet eens verdacht worden door de VS!! U snapt het al, inclusief vrouwen en kinderen……. Dat ‘verdacht’ gaf ik in vet weer, daar de doelen nog altijd verdachten zijn, dus niet door een rechter veroordeelde personen……. Deze vorm van terreur wordt dan ook ‘standrechtelijke executie’ genoemd……….

Overigens uitermate vreemd en schandalig, dat politici als Koenders deze standrechtelijke executies, zoals gezegd een ernstige vorm van terreur, nooit veroordelen. Kijk als Rusland hetzelfde zou doen, waren Koenders rapen allang gaar geweest……..

Hier het artikel van Anti-Media:

U.S. Drone Strikes Have Gone Up 432% Since Trump Took Office

March 7, 2017 at 3:03 pm
Written by Carey Wedler
(ANTIMEDIA) When he was in office, former President Barack Obama earned the ire of anti-war activists for his expansion of Bush’s drone wars. The Nobel Peace Prize-winning head of state ordered ten times more drone strikes than the previous president, and estimates late in Obama’s presidency showed 49 out of 50 victims were civilians. In 2015, it was reported that up to 90% of drone casualties were not the intended targets.
Current President Donald Trump campaigned on a less interventionist foreign policy, claiming to be opposed to nation-building and misguided invasions. But less than two months into his presidency, Trump has expanded the drone strikes that plagued Obama’s “peaceful” presidency.
According to an analysis from Micah Zenko, an analyst with the Council on Foreign Relations, Trump has markedly increased U.S. drone strikes since taking office. Zenko, who reported earlier this year on the over 26,000 bombs Obama dropped in 2016, summarized the increase:
During President Obama’s two terms in office, he approved 542 such targeted strikes in 2,920 days—one every 5.4 days. From his inauguration through today, President Trump had approved at least 36 drone strikes or raids in 45 days—one every 1.25 days.
That’s an increase of 432 percent.
He highlights some of the attacks:
The Trump administration has provided little acknowledgment of the human toll these strikes are taking. As journalist Glenn Greenwald noted in the Intercept, the Trump administration hastily brushed off recent civilian casualties in favor of honoring the life of a single U.S. soldier who died during one of the Yemen raids just days after Trump took office:
The raid in Yemen that cost Owens his life also killed 30 other people, includingmany civilians,’ at least nine of whom were children. None of them were mentioned by Trump in last night’s speech, let alone honored with applause and the presence of grieving relatives. That’s because they were Yemenis, not Americans; therefore, their deaths, and lives, must be ignored (the only exception was some fleeting media mention of the 8-year-old daughter of Anwar al-Awlaki, but only because she was a U.S. citizen and because of the irony that Obama killed her 16-year-old American brother with a drone strike).
Greenwald notes this is typical of not just Trump, but the American war machine in general:
We fixate on the Americans killed, learning their names and life stories and the plight of their spouses and parents, but steadfastly ignore the innocent people the U.S. government kills, whose numbers are always far greater.”
Though some Trump supporters sang his praises as a peace candidate before he took office, the president’s militarism was apparent on many occasions. He openly advocated increasing the size and scope of the military, a promise he is now moving to keep. And as Zenko highlights, Trump was disingenuous with his rhetoric against interventionism:
He claimed to have opposed the 2003 Iraq War when he actually backed it, and to have opposed the 2011 Libya intervention when he actually strongly endorsed it, including with U.S. ground troops. Yet, Trump and his loyalists consistently implied that he would be less supportive of costly and bloody foreign wars, especially when compared to President Obama, and by extension, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
As Trump continues to dig his heels into decades-old policies he has criticized himself — reportedly mulling over sending ground troops into Syria — he is increasingly proving to be yet another establishment warmonger implementing policies that spawn the creation of more terrorists. As Zenko concludes:
We are now on our third post-9/11 administration pursuing many of the same policies that have failed to meaningfully reduce the number of jihadist extremist fighters, or their attractiveness among potential recruits or self-directed terrorists. The Global War on Terrorism remains broadly unquestioned within Washington, no matter who is in the White House.”

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

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden, dit geldt niet voor de labels: al-Awlaki, Wedler en Zenko.

Mijn excuus voor de vormgeving.