Gistermiddag op BBC World Service radio, na 17.00 u. (CET) o.a. aandacht voor de situatie in Venezuela.
De presentator kondigde een correspondent aan, met de naam Rafael Abozabi, althans dat verstond ik, maar kan de naam verder niet terugvinden op de BBC website.
Deze Rafael begon te vertellen dat “We are hearing and seeing on the streets that the Venezolan people support the opposition”, waarna deze figuur nog een enorm aantal demonstranten noemde……
Lullig alleen dat de presentator al had gezegd dat Rafael op dat moment in Miami zat…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Begrijp je meteen de waarde van de BBC ‘fact checkers’, de BBC waar men de vuilbek vol heeft over fake news (nepnieuws) en andere desinformatie……
Alsof er niets is gebeurd de afgelopen dagen en bijvoorbeeld het Rode Kruis en de VN de VS niet hebben opgeroepen te stoppen met haar walgelijk pr-stunt, kwam Rafael met een lul verhaal dat men ging kijken hoe de humanitaire hulp verdeeld kan worden…… De VN en het Rode Kruis hebben een paar dagen geleden verklaard dat er humanitaire hulp aan Venezuela wordt geleverd en dat het leger en vrijwilligers goed meewerken om deze te verspreiden onder de bevolking…..*
Ook het gelul dat Venezuela een brug zou hebben geblokkeerd om hulpgoederen uit de VS tegen te houden, was een smerige leugen, deze brug is niet in gebruik genomen nadat deze in 2015 werd afgebouwd….*
Het viel me nog mee dat de presentator toegaf dat niet iedere politicus achter de plannen van Trump en Bolton staat. Hoewel men even later alleen een voorstander liet horen die het woord deed tijdens een zitting van het House Committee over de situatie in Venezuela….. Heb nog wat langer geluisterd, daar men beloofde terug te keren naar die zitting als er weer wat belangrijks werd gezegd en jawel hoor, even later nog een voorstander van ingrijpen, met een groot aantal leugens over Maduro en Venezuela in het bijzonder, leugens die de BBC ‘belangrijk genoeg’ vond om voor de honderdduizendste keer te herhalen………..
De BBC heeft niets meer van doen met onafhankelijkheid, het is vooringenomen, partijdig en aarzelt niet de boel aan elkaar te liegen, mocht dat nodig zijn, waarbij fake news en manipulatie de wapens zijn waarmee de argeloze luisteraar wordt bestookt……… Kortom; de BBC is verworden tot een propagandazender voor illegale oorlogen en staatsgrepen tegen soevereine landen, voorts ondersteund de BBC de huidige neoliberale status quo, precies wat haar subsidiegever verwacht….. Oh wie die subsidiegever is? De oorlogsmisdadige en verder uiterst inhumane regering May!
Voor meer berichten over de BBC, klik op dat label, direct onder dit bericht. Let wel na een aantal berichten wordt het laatst gelezen bericht telkens herhaald, dan onder het laatst gelezen bericht even opnieuw op dit label klikken, enz. enz.
De westerse reguliere media gingen in een nog hogere hysterie versnelling toen vorige week werd gemeld dat Maduro humanitaire hulp uit de VS zou hebben geblokkeerd voor invoer in het land. Maduro zou dit hebben gedaan om aan het bewind te kunnen blijven en deze ‘paranoïde tiran’ zou liever z’n bevolking uithongeren dan voedsel uit de VS het land binnen te laten…..
Uiteraard ziet de werkelijkheid er zoals gewoonlijk totaal anders uit, zo hebben de VN en het Rode Kruis laten weten dat het hier om een PR stunt van de VS gaat……. Zo is de veel getoonde geblokkeerde brug, een foto deel uitmakend van het opgeklopte verhaal van de Trump administratie, de brug waar de hulpgoederen zouden worden tegengehouden, is een brug van weinig betekenis in deze, sterker nog: deze brug is al jaren gesloten……. Nog sterker, volgens een opiniestuk in de La Opinion is deze in 2015 afgebouwde brug nooit in gebruik genomen……
Bovendien, de persoon die verantwoordelijk is voor dergelijke transporten uit de VS, is in het verleden meermaals door de mand gevallen als wapenhandelaar, dus onder het mom van het brengen van humanitaire noodhulp werden er met deze transporten vooral wapens geleverd……
Echter het belangrijkst is wel het feit dat het Rode Kruis en de VN beiden de VS hebben gewaarschuwd niet door te gaan met deze (belachelijke) PR stunt. Niet voor niets, daar de VN en het Rode Kruis veelal zendingen van humanitaire goederen verzorgen en op deze manier politiek bedrijven zal het werk van deze hulporganisaties in de toekomst alleen maar verder bemoeilijken… Bovendien hebben (internationale) hulporganisaties niet gevraagd om aanvullende hulp van de VS….
Om de werkelijkheid nog verder te benadrukken: de Venezolaanse autoriteiten helpen hulporganisaties met de verspreiding van hulpgoederen, goederen waarvoor het Rode Kruis het hulpbudget onlangs verdubbelde en tevreden is over de medewerking van het Maduro regime…….
Hoe is het mogelijk dat de reguliere media zover meegaan in het verdraaien van feiten? Is men er zo van overtuigd de meerderheid van de bevolking te kunnen overtuigen van leugens en halve waarheden, dat men de smerige buitenlandpolitiek van de VS helpt uitdragen…??? Een cliché op deze plek intussen, maar de vraag stellen is haar beantwoorden: inderdaad!! Je liegt, verzwijgt zaken en draait met je collega’s de waarheid op zo’n manier dat het volk de leugens en andere desinformatie gelooft…….. Elke kritiek op die valse berichtgeving, ook al wordt dit gedaan middels feitenmateriaal, wordt door die media (gesteund door politici) afgedaan als ‘fake news’ (nepnieuws) en desinformatie…….
Lees het volgende artikel van Adam Johnson, eerder gepubliceerd op FAIR.org, door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media en geeft het door, schudt de wereld wakker voordat een volgend land volkomen naar god wordt geholpen door de VS (met de steun van NAVO troepen [dus ook met misbruik van ons belastinggeld] in Colombia, waar deze terreurorganisatie 2 militaire bases heeft):
Western Media Fall in Lockstep for Cheap Trump/Rubio Venezuela Aid PR Stunt
(FAIR) — The Trump administration’s now completely overt effort to overthrow Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro had a very successful public relations effort this week, as major Western media outlets uniformly echoed its simplistic, pre-packaged claim that the Venezuelan government was heartlessly withholding foreign aid:
All of the above articles—and scores more like it—repeated the same script: Maduro was blocking aid from the US “out of refusal to relinquish power,” preferring to starve “his own people” rather than feed them. It’s a simple case of good and evil—of a tyrannical, paranoid dictator not letting in aid to feed a starving population.
Except three pieces of key context are missing. Context that, when presented to a neutral observer, would severely undermine the cartoonish narrative being advanced by US media.
Both the Red Cross and UN warned the US not to engage in this aid PR stunt.
The bridge in question is a visual metaphor contrived by the Trump administration of little practical relevance.
The person in charge of US operations in Venezuela has a history of using aid as a cover to deliver weapons to right-wing mercenaries.
(1) Not only has the international aid community not asked for the “aid,” earlier this week, both the International Red Cross and United Nations warned the US to explicitly not engage in these types of PR stunts. As Washington Post contributor Vincent Bevins pointed out, the transparent cynicism of these efforts was preemptively warned about by the groups actually charged with keeping starving people fed:
The International Committee of the Red Cross has warned the United States about the risks of delivering humanitarian aid to Venezuela without the approval of security forces loyal to President Nicolas Maduro.
UNITED NATIONS — The United Nations warned on Wednesday against using aid as a pawn in Venezuela after the United States sent food and medicine to the country’s border and accused President Nicolas Maduro of blocking its delivery with trucks and shipping containers.
Indeed, as Bevins also noted, the Red Cross has long been working with local authorities inside Venezuela to deliver relief, and just last week doubled its budget to do so. We have ample evidence the Maduro government is more than willing to work with international aid when it’s offered in good faith, not when it’s a thinly veiled mechanism to spur civil war and contrive PR victories for those seeking to overthrow the government. It’s not just Maduro—as the Western media are presenting it—who opposes the US aid convoy; it’s the UN and Red Cross. Why do none of the above reports note this rather key piece of information, instead giving the reader the impression it’s only the stance of a sadistic, power-hungry madman?
(2) Despite dozens of media outlets giving the impression (and sometimes explicitly saying) that the Venezuelan government shut down an otherwise functioning pathway into the country, the bridge in question hasn’t been open for years.
It’s true the Venezuelan government appears to have placed an oil tanker and cargo containers on the bridge to prevent incursion from the Colombian side, but the other barriers, as writer and software developer Jason Emery noted, have been in place since at least 2016. According to La Opinion (2/5/16), after its initial construction in 2015, the bridge has never been open to traffic. How can Maduro, as the BBCsuggested, “reopen” a bridge that was never open?
The reality is BBC and other Western media were just going along with the narrative pushed by Sen. Marco Rubio and Trump Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, not bothering to check if their primary visual narrative was based on a bad faith, context-free PR stunt.
This point is a relatively superficial one, but in a long term PR battle to win over Western liberals for further military escalation, the superficial matters a lot. Rubio and the Trump administration cooked up a gimmicky visual metaphor, and almost every outlet uncritically passed it along, often making factually inaccurate assumptions along the way—assumptions the Trump State Department and CIA coordinating the effort knew very well they would make.
(3) The Venezuelan government has an entirely rational reason to suspect the US would use humanitarian aid as a cover to smuggle in weapons to foment armed conflict: The person running quarterback for Trump on the current Venezuela operation, Elliot Abrams, literally did just that 30 years ago.
From the first two paragraphs (emphasis added) of a 1987 AP/New York Times article on Elliott Abrams, “Abrams Denies Wrongdoing in Shipping Arms to Contras” (8/17/87—h/t Kevin Gosztola):
Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams has defended his role in authorizing the shipment of weapons on a humanitarian aid flight to Nicaraguan rebels, saying the operation was ”strictly by the book.”
Mr. Abrams spoke at a news conference Saturday in response to statements by Robert Duemling, former head of the State Department’s Nicaraguan humanitarian assistance office, who said he had twice ordered planes to shuttle weapons for the Contras on aid planes at Mr. Abrams’ direction in early 1986.
It’s literally the same person. It’s not that Maduro is vaguely paranoid the US, in general, would dust off its 1980s’ Contra-backing Cold War playbook, or some unspecified assumption about a higher-up or two at State. It’s literally the exact same person in charge of the operation who we know—with 100 percent certainty, because he admitted to it—has a history of using aid convoys as a cover to smuggle in arms to right-wing militias.
It’s all playing out right now, in real time. The same actors, the same tricks, the same patently disingenuous concern for the starving poor. And the US media is stripping it of all this essential context, presenting these radical regime-change operators as bleeding heart humanitarians.
The same US media outlets that have expressly fundraised and run ad campaigns on their image as anti-Trump truth-tellers have mysteriously taken at face value everything the Trump White House and its neoconservative allies have said in their campaign to overthrow the government of Venezuela. The self-aggrandizing “factchecking” brigade that emerged to confront the Trump administration is suddenly nonexistent as it rolls out a transparent, cynical PR strategy to delegitimize a Latin American government it’s trying to overthrow.
(de opgeblazen oorlogshitser en oorlogsmisdadiger Pompeo beweert dat Hezbollah werkzaam is in Venezuela en daar een leger heeft dat gezien zijn woorden amper onder doet voor de gezamenlijke NAVO troepen… ha! ha! ha! Ook hier is totaal geen bewijs voor deze belachelijke beschuldiging…)
Op CounterPunch van 8 februari jl. een artikel van Roger Harris waarin hij een aantal zaken opvoert die duidelijk maken dat Guaidó een zetbaasje is van de VS en dat de zogenaamde afzetting van Maduro (immers op order van de VS stelde Guaidó dat hij de nieuwe president is) en een eventuele installatie van Guaidó als president volkomen tegen de Venezolaanse constitutie ingaat…….. Bovendien is Guaidó voorzitter van een kleine oppositie partij (Voluntad Popular) en niet de oppositieleider van Venezuela, zoals de reguliere media je keer op keer willen doen geloven….. Sterker nog: Guaidó zou zelfs niet tot de top van zijn partij behoren, aldus Harris, voorts zouden andere oppositiepartijen Guaidó niet steunen…..
Lees het volgende artikel en geeft het ajb door, het is van het hoogste belang dat de VS, de NAVO, de EU, Canada en een aantal Latijns Amerikaanse landen met hun handen afblijven van Venezuela…… Als het tot een inval van de VS en de NAVO in Venezuela komt, zullen veel Venezolanen het leven verliezen en gezien de agressie van de VS en haar terreurorganisatie NAVO, zal een fiks deel van Venezuela in puin worden gelegd…….
Laten de VS, Canada en de EU zich maar eens bemoeien met de genocide in Jemen en dan niet op de manier van de VS, het helpen bij die genocide, maar door de Saoedische terreurcoalitie te isoleren, te boycotten en zo te dwingen te stoppen met alweer een genocide, die het westen tegen de eerder door haarzelf gedane verklaringen in, na de genocide in Rwanda, toch laat gebeuren……
Kan het westen eindelijk ook eens Israël onder druk zetten te stoppen met de etnische zuivering van Palestijnen en te stoppen met de massamoorden op dit verdrukte volk…..
De situatie in Jemen en de Palestijnse gebieden is duizenden keren erger dan die in Venezuela en toch wil men bij de laatste, geheel hypocriet, wel ingrijpen……. Vergeet natuurlijk niet dat de situatie in Venezuela geheel te danken is aan de economische oorlog die de VS tegen dit land voerde en voert (nu met de zogenaamd gelegaliseerde hulp middels sancties van de EU…)
Donald Trump imagines Juan Guaidó is the rightful president of Venezuela. Mr. Guaidó, a man of impeccable illegitimacy, was exposed by Cohen and Blumenthal as “a product of a decade-long project overseen by Washington’s elite regime change trainers.” Argentinian sociologist Marco Teruggi described Guaidó in the same article as “a character that has been created for this circumstance” of regime change. Here, his constitutional credentials to be interim president of Venezuela are deconstructed.
Educated at George Washington University in DC, Guaidó was virtually unknown in his native Venezuela before being thrust on to the world stage in a rapidly unfolding series of events. In a poll conducted a little more than a week before Guaidó appointed himself president of the country, 81% of Venezuelans had never even heard of the 35-year-old.
To make a short story shorter, US Vice President Pence phoned Guaidó on the evening of January 22rd and presumably asked him how’d he like to be made president of Venezuela. The next day, Guaidó announced that he considered himself president of Venezuela, followed within minutes by US President Trump confirming the self-appointment.
A few weeks before on January 5, Guaidó had been installed as president of Venezuela’s National Assembly, their unicameral legislature. He had been elected to the assembly from a coastal district with 26% of the vote. It was his party’s turn for the presidency of the body, and he was hand-picked for the position. Guaidó, even within his own party, was not in the top leadership.
Guaidó’s party, Popular Will, is a far-right marginal group whose most enthusiastic boosters are John Bolton, Elliott Abrams, and Mike Pompeo. Popular Will had adopted a strategy of regime change by extra-parliamentary means rather than engage in the democratic electoral process and had not participated in recent Venezuelan elections.
Although anointed by Trump and company, Guaidó’s Popular Will Party is not representative of the “Venezuelan opposition,” which is a fractious bunch whose hatred of Maduro is only matched by their abhorrence of each other. Leading opposition candidate Henri Falcón, who ran against Maduro in 2018 on a neoliberal austerity platform, had been vehemently opposed by Popular Will who demanded that he join their US-backed boycott of the election.
The Venezuelan news outlet, Ultimas Noticias, reported that prominent opposition politician Henrique Capriles, who had run against Maduro in 2013, “affirmed during an interview that the majority of opposition parties did not agree with the self-swearing in of Juan Guaidó as interim president of the country.” Claudio Fermin, president of the party Solutions for Venezuela, wrote “we believe in the vote, in dialogue, we believe in coming to an understanding, we believe Venezuelans need to part ways with the extremist sectors that only offer hatred, revenge, lynching.” Key opposition governor of the State of Táchira, Laidy Gómez, has rejected Guaidó’s support of intervention by the US, warning that it “would generate death of Venezuelans.”
The Guaidó/Trump cabal does not reflect the democratic consensus in Venezuela, where polls consistently show super majorities oppose outside intervention. Popular opinion in Venezuela supports negotiations between the government and the opposition as proposed by Mexico, Uruguay, and the Vatican. The Maduro administration has embraced the negotiations as a peaceful solution to the crisis facing Venezuela.
The US government rejects a negotiated solution, in the words of Vice President Pence: “This is no time for dialogue; this is time for action.” This intransigent position is faithfully echoed by Guaidó. So while most Venezuelans want peace, the self-appointed president, backed by the full force of US military power, wrote in a New York Times op-ed that it was possible to “end the Maduro regime with a minimum of bloodshed.”
The Guaidó/Trump cabal’s fig leaf for legitimacy is based on the bogus argument that Article 233 of the Venezuelan constitution gives the National Assembly the power to declare a national president’s “abandonment” of the office. In which case, the president of the National Assembly can serve as an interim national president, until presidential elections are held. The inconvenient truth is that Maduro has shown no inclination to abandon his post, and the constitution says no such thing.
In fact, the grounds for replacing a president are very clearly laid out in the first paragraph of Article 233 of the Venezuelan constitution and do not include fraudulent or illegitimate election, which is what the cabal has been claiming. In the convoluted logic of the US government and its epigones, if the people elect someone the cabal doesn’t like, the election is by definition fraudulent and the democratically elected winner is ipso facto a dictator.
The function of adjudicating the validity of an election, as in any country, is to be dealt with through court challenges, not by turning to Donald Trump for his approval. And certainly not by anointing an individual from a party that could have run in the 2018 election but decided to boycott.
The Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ), which is the separate supreme court branch of the Venezuelan government has certified Maduro’s reelection, as have independent international observers. Further, no appeal was filed by any of the boycotting parties, while all participating parties – including opposition ones – signed off on the validity of the election after the polls closed.
The far-right opposition has boycotted the high court as well as the electoral process. They contest the legitimacy of the TSJ because some members of the TSJ were appointed by a lame duck National Assembly favorable to Maduro, after a new National Assembly with a majority in opposition had been elected in December 2015 but not yet seated.
Even if President Maduro were somehow deemed to have experienced what is termed a falta absoluta (i.e., some sort of void in the presidency due to death, insanity, absence, etc.), the National Assembly president is only authorized to take over if the falta absoluta occurs before the lawful president “takes possession.” However, Maduro was already “in possession” before the January 10, 2019 presidential inauguration and even before the May 10, 2018 presidential election. Maduro had won the presidency in the 2013 election and ran and won reelection last May.
If the falta absoluta is deemed to have occurred during the first four years of the presidential term, the vice president takes over. Then the constitution decrees that a snap election for the presidency must be held within 30 days. This is what happened when President Hugo Chávez died while in office in 2013. Then Vice President Nicolás Maduro succeeded to the presidency, called for new elections, and was elected by the people of Venezuela.
If it is deemed that the falta absoluta occurred during the last two years of the six-year presidential term, the vice president serves until the end of the term, according to the Venezuelan constitution. And if the time of the alleged falta absoluta is unclear – when Maduro presided over “illegitimate” elections in 2018, as is claimed by the far-right opposition – it is up to the TSJ to decide, not the head of the National Assembly or even such an august authority as US Senator Marco Rubio. Or the craven US press (too numerous to cite), which without bothering to read the plain language of the Bolivarian Constitution, repeatedly refers to Guaidó as the “constitutionally authorized” or “legitimate” president.
As Alfred de Zayas, United Nations independent expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, tweeted: “Article 233 of the Venezuelan constitution is inapplicable and cannot be twisted into legitimizing Guaidó’s self-proclamation as interim President. A coup is a coup.”
(de opgeblazen oorlogshitser en oorlogsmisdadiger Pompeo beweert dat Hezbollah werkzaam is in Venezuela en daar een leger heeft dat gezien zijn woorden amper onder doet voor de gezamenlijke NAVO troepen… ha! ha! ha! Ook hier is totaal geen bewijs voor deze belachelijke beschuldiging…)
Benieuwd of staatssecretaris Mona Keijzer weet had van het feit dat het CDA al jaren loopt te zeuren over de veel te grote regeldruk in Nederland (nee, niet voor jou en andere burgers, maar voor bedrijven), toen ze vorige week donderdag liet weten dat de regeldruk met maar liefst 10% is gestegen, waarover ze durfde te zeggen dat deze stijging haar meeviel……
Evenzo benieuwd ben ik naar de reactie van het CDA achter gesloten deuren, op deze opmerking van Keijzer…..
Tja, als het aan het CDA ligt komt er zelfs een verbod op berichten waarin bijvoorbeeld de intensieve veehouderij in een kwaad daglicht wordt gesteld (en dat gebaseerd op feiten)….. Of wat dacht je van het onder de pet houden van gegevens over welke boerderijen met dierziekten te kampen hebben en die kunnen overslaan op de mens….. Zo hielden destijds ministers van het CDA, hare hufterigheid Verburg (die nu godbetert werkt voor de VN >> FAO…) en CDA zakkenwasser Klink, respectievelijk ministers van landbouw en volksgezondheid, gegevens onder de pet over welke intensieve geitenmishandelaars Q-koorts op het bedrijf hadden, dit ondanks herhaalde verzoeken van de GGD in Brabant de gegevens vrij te geven, om zo de gezondheid van omwonenden te kunnen beschermen……
Gevolg was een fiks aantal doden en een groot aantal mensen die voor het leven chronisch ziek zijn geworden door die Q-koorts…… Ofwel Verburg en Klink zijn verantwoordelijk voor meerdere moorden en poging tot moorden, waar ze onbegrijpelijk genoeg mee weg zijn gekomen…….
Terug naar Mona Keijzer en de regeldruk, wat nog anders te doen dan….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!
Tot slot: regeldruk is er voor het overgrote deel niet voor niets en ondanks die regeldruk hebben we keer op keer te maken met bijvoorbeeld voedselschandalen en enorme schandalen in de intensieve martelveehouderij (waar ik doel op de hel voor dieren waar deze arme wezens hun veel te korte leven in slijten…)….. In ons land gaat de economie veelal ver voor op de volksgezondheid, dit zou in het belang van die volksgezondheid moeten veranderen, door de invoering van echte regeldruk die met veel controle wordt afgedwongen! Echter juist aan die controle heeft het CDA de pest, niet voor niets dat onder Balkenende de inspecties werden uitgekleed en voor het grootste samengebracht in de NVWA, een zwaar onderbemenst orgaan, dat zelfs bij de intensieve martelveehouderij aandringt op het melden van misstanden, daar men eenvoudigweg de mensen niet heeft om zelf het grote aantal misstanden te achterhalen…….
Afgelopen maandagmiddag rond 17.20 u. op Radio1, de Nederlandse ambassadeur voor Jemen, Irma van Dueren. De ‘vegggvelende’ flut ‘pggesentator’ van de ‘onafhankelijke zendgemachtigde’ NOS, Lara Rense sprak met haar over de situatie in Jemen……
Gelukkig was Irma van Dueren nog wel enigszins op de hoogte van de situatie in Jemen, hoewel de Nederlandse ambassade daar al een paar jaar is gesloten. Van Dueren stelde dat de situatie in Jemen heel ernstig is en ja daarmee zei ze hooguit veel te weinig, als je nagaat dat er een genocide tegen de sjiitische bevolking van Jemen wordt uitgevoerd…… Het woord genocide viel niet één keer, ‘ook niet’ uit de mond van Rense, terwijl er intussen bijvoorbeeld al meer dan 85.000 kinderen zijn omgekomen in die genocide……..
Nee volgens van Dueren is er een oorlog aan de gang en als je haar beluistert zou je bijna denken dat dit tussen twee gelijke partijen is…… Nederland steunt de wettige regering van Jemen, aldus van Dueren, echter hoe wettig is een regering die al lang weg had moeten zijn, NB geleid door een president die het presidentschap neerlegde en onder druk van Saoedi-Arabië weer op zich nam, zodat hij S-A te hulp te roepen in de strijd tegen de Houthi’s…….
Het voorgaande, terwijl die president, Al-Hadi eerder soennitische terreurgroepen IS (ISIS) en Al Qaida onderdak gaf in Jemen, waarop deze terreurgroepen, gesteund door het soennitische Saoedi-Arabië begonnen met het vermoorden van de Jemenitische sjiieten, zelfs in moskeeën…… Ofwel de opstand van de Houthi’s destijds was volledig geoorloofd, echter door figuren als van Dueren en de Nederlandse staat wordt de schoft Al-Hadi gesteund, ofwel Nederland steunt het Saoedische terreurbewind en daarmee de genocide die in Jemen wordt uitgevoerd….. En dan te bedenken dat de verantwoordelijk minister, zijne VVD hufterigheid Blok al 2 keer moties van wantrouwen wist te overleven, moties ingediend vanwege de Nederlandse steun voor uiterst gewelddadige terreurgroepen in Syrië…..
Van Dueren durfde te stellen dat de Houthi’s ook humanitaire hulpgoederen tegenhouden, echter daar is geen flinter aan bewijs voor…..
Of van Dueren wel eens in Jemen komt, jawel ze was er vorig jaar nog even geweest en sprak volgens eigen zeggen toen met de Houthi rebellen…… Van Dueren maakte er geen geheim van dat ze veel vaker in Saoedi-Arabië zit en daar overlegt met de reli-fascistische dictatuur….. Of Nederland wel eens iets zegt over de bombardementen van de Saoediërs op Jemen, wel nu beste bezoeker, daar kwam eigenlijk geen antwoord op, anders dan dat ze veel overleg heeft met S-A…. Nederland zou Jemen steunen met humanitaire hulp, echter zo te horen gaat die hulp naar het foute Saoedische kamp, waarvan Al-Hadi en zijn kliek deel uitmaken………
Van Dueren overlegt liever met de VN zo stelde ze, alsof daar allemaal heilige boontjes zitten die het beste ophebben met de sjiitische bevolking van Jemen……..
Rense vroeg ‘uiteraard niet’ naar de jongste bombardementen van de Saoedische terreurcoalitie, waar men een vluchtelingenkamp en silo’s voor graan bombardeerde, graan dat met de noodhulp wordt aangevoerd en waarbij 2 van deze silo’s werden vernietigd…… Des te belangrijker deze vraag, daar de Saoedische coalitie daarmee de met de Houthi’s gesloten wapenstilstand heeft geschonden…. Rense had dit moeten weten, evenals van Dueren die duidelijk hoorbaar zenuwachtig was (gegarandeerd last van een kwaad geweten….)
Waar al helemaal niet over gesproken werd waren de goede handelsbetrekkingen die Nederland onderhoudt met Saoedi-Arabië en het feit dat Nederland wapenonderdelen heeft geleverd aan S-A op basis van de leugen dat het niet ging om wapenleveranties……. Benieuwd of van Dueren daar nog een rol in heeft gespeeld, het zou me (alweer) niet verbazen……..
Jezus, wat een triest en smerig zootje hypocrieten……
Ongelofelijk maar waar: Sam Harris, volgens de schrijver van het hieronder opgenomen artikel, Caitlin Johnstone, een goeroe van de atheïsten, heeft laten weten dat hij het verhaal gelooft dat Rusland de presidentsverkiezingen van 2016 heeft gemanipuleerd, ondanks dat daar totaal geen bewijs voor is gegeven en dat na 2 jaar lang leugens over deze zaak (zonder dat men in die tijd met bewijzen kwam…)….
Harris liet als atheïst o.a. weten het niet te begrijpen dat mensen een geloof omarmen, een geloof bijvoorbeeld in een god, waarvoor elk bewijs ontbreekt…….. Nu doet deze Harris precies hetzelfde als christenen doen, geloven in een zaak die niet te bewijzen is, daar deze nooit heeft plaatsgevonden….
Je vraagt je wellicht af waarom Harris gelooft dat Rusland de verkiezingen manipuleerde, wel dat is héééél simpel: de geheime diensten van de VS zeggen dat het zo is……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Als er nu één ding duidelijk is, is het wel het feit dat de geheime diensten in de VS vooral goed zijn in liegen, zelfs als het tegendeel meer dan bewezen is, neem de leugens die hebben geleid tot de illegale oorlog in 2003 van de VS en haar NAVO partners tegen Irak. De claim dat Irak massavernietigingswapens had, was al 10 keer naar de prullenbak verwezen door het VN team van wapeninspecteurs o.l.v. Blix…….
The other day RT reporter Dan Cohen flagged how New Atheism guru Sam Harris recently had a shady cold war manipulator on his podcast promulgating the establishment narrative that Russian hackers and trolls interfered in the 2016 US election, despite the fact that there is no more publicly available evidence for this than there is for the existence of biblical Jehovah. I find this both fascinating and hilarious.
(uiteraard is dit niet de ‘video’ die bij het Twitterbericht hoort, echter in deze gesproken tekst gaat Harris uitvoerig in op de leugen die men ‘Russiagate’ is gaan noemen, voor het origineel klik hier) Harris, author of The End of Faith and commonly mentioned in the same breath as atheistic thought leaders like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, once wrote the following:
“While believing strongly, without evidence, is considered a mark of madness or stupidity in any other area of our lives, faith in God still holds immense prestige in our society. Religion is the one area of our discourse where it is considered noble to pretend to be certain about things no human being could possibly be certain about. It is telling that this aura of nobility extends only to those faiths that still have many subscribers. Anyone caught worshipping Poseidon, even at sea, will be thought insane.”
Belief in the establishment Russia narrative is very much the same. As Ray McGovern of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity recently documented in an excellent article for Consortium News titled “A Look Back at Clapper’s Jan. 2017 ‘Assessment’ on Russia-gate”, the entire election meddling narrative was built upon an ODNI* assessment by two dozen analysts hand-picked and overseen by James Clapper. McGovern notes how Clapper, then the Director of National Intelligence, is notorious for having helped sell the lies that led to the Iraq invasion, for lying to congress about NSA surveillance, and for multiple instances of claiming that Russians are genetically predisposed to nefarious behavior.
We the public have never seen the evidence that led to this extremely shady assessment’s findings, yet those findings have gradually been integrated into mass media reports as infallible fact upon which the rest of the establishment Russia narrative has been built. Like belief in mainstream religions, the only reason its lack of evidence fails to come into question is because it has been made popular by mainstream politicians and credulous media talking heads who have been reporting it as fact day in and day out for two years, without adding any solid, tangible evidence to the equation beyond the unsubstantiated say-so of intelligence agencies with an extensive record of lying to the public to manufacture support for preexisting geopolitical agendas. It’s an entirely faith-based narrative, only instead of placing faith in the words of priests and books authored by long-dead men, faith is placed in the authoritative say-so of the imperial intelligence community.
Waking Up Podcast #145 – The Information War | Sam Harris
In this episode of the podcast, Sam Harris speaks with Renée DiResta about Russia’s “Internet Research Agency” and its efforts to amplify conspiracy thinking and partisan conflict in the United…
samharris.org
It’s funny then, given the aforementioned quote, that Harris escalated his already highly credulous relationship with the CIA Russia narrative in a podcast earlier this month titled “The Information War” in which he nodded faithfully along with a guest whose organization was recently exposed as having manufactured the appearance of Russian election meddling in an Alabama Senate race. His guest, Renee DiResta, is named in a December New York Times report for her involvement in a project by narrative control firm New Knowledge, which claims in an internal document to have “orchestrated an elaborate ‘false flag’ operation that planted the idea that the [Alabama Senate candidate Roy] Moore campaign was amplified on social media by a Russian botnet.” This same narrative control firm which manufactured the bogus story that Moore was being amplified by Russian bots also authored two reports on Russian social media meddling for the US Congress in December which set off a week’s worth of hysterical shrieking headlines.
At no time in Harris’ interview with DiResta does he question any of her cold war rhetoric or baseless assertions, and indeed he eggs her along with agreeable questions along the lines of the CIA/CNN Russia narrative.
“Many people, certainly most Trump supporters, continue to doubt whether Russia interfered in anything in 2016,” Harris said, as though skepticism of the unproven claims of shady intelligence agencies is a bad thing, then asked point-blank, “Is there any basis for doubt about that at this point?”
“Nope,” DiResta replied.
“This is just crystal clear as a matter of what our intelligence services tell us, and a matter of what people like you can ascertain by just studying online behavior?” Harris helpfully added.
“It happened,” DiResta replied. “There’s really nothing else to say about it. The intelligence agencies know it happened, foreign governments know it happened, the platforms acknowledge it happened.
There may be some small group of people that continues to live like ostriches, but that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.”
Intelligence agencies know something happened, therefore it happened. The Pope knows bread and wine transubstantiates into the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ, therefore it happens. Sam Harris went right along with this, completely unquestioning like a good little cult member.
In an article for The Nation, journalist Aaron Maté breaks down how the data within the establishment Russia narrative itself shows that Russia’s social media involvement in US politics was “small, amateurish, and mostly unrelated to the 2016 election,” with only a tiny fraction of the Russia-based Internet Research Agency’s US content having anything to do with the election at all, a very small amount of funds allocated to the total project, and making up an infinitesimally small percentage of total social media content viewed by Americans. Maté has also noted that the total expenditure on IRA posts for the entire US election is actually comparable to what New Knowledge spent on its “false flag operation” in the Alabama Senate race alone, which New Knowledge claims was too small to have impacted the election.
If that’s not enough reason for you to be skeptical, Maté and the Moon of Alabama blog point out that there is no evidence that the Internet Research Agency had any intent to influence the election, nor indeed that it is anything other than a for-profit clickbait operation. Looking at the content of the posts we’ve been shown and the statistics we’ve been told about them, this is very difficult to argue against, which is probably why nobody ever tries to.
Sam Harris the credulous atheist never brings any of this up, uncritically letting his guest spout faith-based doctrine about both Kremlin social media interference and Russian hacking.
“Let’s talk about the WikiLeaks data dump,” DiResta said later in the podcast. “So as you mentioned at the start, the GRU** had this hack, they had these emails and they laundered these emails through WikiLeaks. They gave them to WikiLeaks.”
There is no more publicly available evidence that this happened than there is that the Qur’an is the actual, literal word of actual, literal Allah, yet Sam Harris the credulous atheist never asked her for evidence of her claims. He uncritically let her advance not just establishment narratives but establishment agendas as well, nodding agreeably along as she called for social media platforms to collaborate with intelligence agencies and grieved about America being legally unable to respond with propaganda of its own to Russian online manipulations.
Support for establishment cold war narratives against Russia is not the only front along which Sam Harris finds himself in alignment with neoconservatism, whose push for a more aggressive posture toward the USSR was one of the early tenets of the movement. Harris’ extensive history of Islamophobic comments and his sympathetic attitude toward the so-called “war on terror” and US military interventionism in Muslim-majority nations play right into the hands of neoconservative agendas in the Middle East, and he’s been accused of being a closet neocon so much he’s had to publicly address it. Neoconservatives have been consistently wrong about literally everything to do with foreign policy for decades, yet Sam Harris the credulous atheist finds theirs a sufficiently rational ideology to ride alongside. There is no more evidence that US interventionism in the Middle East is helpful than there is for the existence of Vishnu, yet Sam Harris the credulous atheist uncritically endorses it.
Establishment-fueled Russia hysteria is a religion. It is an entirely faith-based belief system which has toxic effects on the people who subscribe to it, and toxic effects on the world as it manufactures support for insane escalations between two nuclear superpowers. As we discussed yesterday, if you don’t have a functioning radar for detecting malignant narratives, you might get lucky and find yourself in opposition to some pernicious belief systems, yet also find yourself selling CIA narratives to your very large online audience as well.
Credulous atheist Sam Harris doesn’t oppose all religions. He is critical of some of them, and he is a zealous bishop of others.
URL: https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1vY Hier nog een gesprek tussen Harris en Renée DiResta, ‘Waking Up Podcast #145’ waarvan zoals je ziet de afbeelding al te zien was in het op één na laatste Twitterbericht:
* ODNI: Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
InformationClearing House bracht gisteren een artikel over de plannen van de VS met Latijns-Amerika, van belang nu het er toch op lijkt dat de VS aanzienlijke troepenverminderingen zal doorvoeren in het Midden-Oosten.
Thierry Mason, de schrijver van het artikel gaat uitvoerig in op de bestaande status quo in Latijns-Amerika, waar bijvoorbeeld Venezuela al tijden in de schijnwerpers staat. De VS is al jaren bezig met een economische oorlogsvoering tegen Venezuela, waarbij o.a. de VS winkelketens voor levensmiddelen al een aantal jaren geleden onder druk werden gezet door de Obama administratie hun winkels en magazijnen in Venezuela niet langer te bevoorraden……
Deze smerige ‘tactiek’ heeft deels gewerkt, de middenstand en de hogere klasse gooiden de kont tegen de krib en met uiterst gewelddadige demonstraties probeerde men Maduro tot aftreden te dwingen en zoals we weten is dit niet gelukt. Men gaf de regering Maduro de schuld van dat geweld, echter uit beelden bleek dat veel demonstranten gewapend waren en op de politie schoten, naar verluid ging het hier om door de VS aangevoerde terroristen…..
Bolton heeft Venezuela, Cuba* en Nicaragua aangewezen als as van het kwaad in Latijns-Amerika en heeft gesteld dat de VS daar wil ingrijpen, ofwel er staan weer nieuwe illegale oorlogen van de VS op stapel….. De NAVO heeft in opdracht van haar bevelhebber, de VS Columbia toegelaten als lid van deze ‘Noord Atlantische Verdragsorganisatie…..’ (ha! ha! ha! ha!) Intussen schijnt terreurorganisatie NAVO twee militaire bases te hebben in dat land, dicht op de grens met o.a. Venezuela…….
Voorts heeft de VS landen als Brazilië in de zak (dat overigens onder fascist Bolsonaro nauw samenwerkt met terreurstaat Israël). Guyana (eerder Brits-Guiana genoemd) een ander buurland van Venezuela, wordt zoals de voormalige naam al zegt in feite door Groot-Brittannië gecontroleerd en bestuurd, GB ook al geen vriend van Venezuela, om het maar zachtjes uit te drukken…….. En dan beste bezoeker is daar… Nederland dat een dikke vinger in de Antilliaanse pap heeft, waar de Nederlandse marine in het gebied van de Antilliaanse eilanden (relatief dicht op Venezuela) nauw samenwerkt met de VS, zogenaamd alleen tegen drugssmokkelaars, echter je hoeft geen universitaire graad te hebben om te begrijpen dat deze samenwerking veel verder gaat dan het tegengaan van drugssmokkel…..
Na 13.00 u. vanmiddag kwam WDR nog eens met een aantal leugens over Maduro, dit n.a.v. de inauguratie van Maduro voor zijn tweede termijn als president. Zo werd gesteld dat het grootste deel van de Venezolaanse bevolking tegen Maduro is, dit is een grove leugen, de meerderheid staat wel degelijk achter Maduro, t.w. de grote onderlaag van die bevolking……. Uiteraard werd weer gesteld dat Maduro een desastreus economisch beleid voert, met geen woord werd over de economische oorlog van de VS tegen dat land gesproken, waardoor bijvoorbeeld zelfs medicijnen moeilijk of niet te krijgen zijn, het blokkeren van dergelijke importen is zonder meer een ernstige oorlogsmisdaad……
Lees het volgende artikel van Meyssan en geeft het ajb door, de wereld zit allesbehalve te wachten op oorlogen in Latijns-Amerika. De VS dient zich eindelijk terug te trekken op eigen grondgebied en het fascisme dat ook in Latijns-Amerika op weg terug is naar de macht, moet de pas afgesneden worden, deze ultrarechtse schoften die al zoveel ellende hebben gebracht over de wereld, moeten worden bestreden, voor ze nog veel meer onheil kunnen aanrichten! Opvallend ook het bericht dat de zoon van de Surinaamse president Bouterse niet werd gearresteerd vanwege drugssmokkel, maar vanwege zijn poging het Libanese Hezbollah te introduceren in Suriname….. Dino Bouterse werd in 2013 ondanks zijn diplomatieke paspoort in Panama (dat onder controle van de VS staat) gearresteerd (!!) en uitgeleverd aan de VS waar hij werd veroordeeld tot 16 jaar cel……
The Terrible Forthcoming Destruction of the “Caribbean Basin”
President Trump has announced the withdrawal of US combat troops from the « Greater Middle East », but the Pentagon is still pursuing the implementation of the Rumsfeld-Cebrowski plan. This time the aim is to destroy the States of the “Caribbean Basin “. This is nothing like the overthrow of pro-Soviet regimes, as in the 1970’s, but the destruction of all regional State structures, without consideration for friends or political enemies. Thierry Meyssan observes the preparations for this new series of wars.
By Thierry Meyssan
January 10, 2019 “Information Clearing House” – In a series of previous articles, we presented the SouthCom plan to provoke wars between the Latin-American nations in order to destroy the structures of all the States in the « Caribbean Basin » [1]. Preparations for wars of this magnitude, intended to follow on from the conflicts in the « Greater Middle East » according to the Rumsfeld-Cebrowski strategy, requires a decade [2]. After the period of economic destabilisation [3] and that of military preparation, the actual operation should begin in the years to come by an attack on Venezuela by Brazil (supported by Israël), Colombia (an ally of the United States) and Guyana (in other words, the United Kingdom). It will be followed by others, beginning with Cuba and Nicaragua (the « troïka of tyranny » according to John Bolton). However, the original plan may be modified, particularly because of the return of the imperial ambitions of the United Kingdom [4] which may influence the Pentagon. This is where we are now :
The evolution of Venezuela
Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez had developed relations with the « Greater Middle East » on an ideological basis. He had in particular grown closer to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Syrian President Bachar el-Assad. Together, they had imagined the possibility of founding an intergovernmental organisation, the « Free Allies Movement », on the model of the « Non-Aligned Movement », which was paralysed by the alignment with the United States, over time, of certain of its members [5].
Although Nicolas Maduro adopted the same language as Hugo Chávez, he chose a very different foreign policy. It is true that he continued the rapprochement with Russia and, in his turn welcomed Russian bombers to Venezuela. He signed a contract to import 600,000 tonnes of wheat in order to deal with starvation in his country. Above all, he prepared to receive six billion dollars of investments, including five in the oil sector. Russian engineers took over the posts which were intended for Venezuelan workers but which they had abandoned.
Nicolas Maduro reorganised the alliances of his country on new foundations. He wove close links with Turkey, which is a member of NATO and whose army presently occupies Northern Syria. Maduro went to Istanbul on four occasions and Erdoğan went once to Caracas. Switzerland was an ally of Hugo Chávez, and had advised him for the composition of his Constitution. Fearing that he would be unable to refine his country’s gold in Switzerland, Nicolas Maduro looked to Turkey, which transformed the raw material into bullion. In the past, this gold had remained in Swiss banks as a guarantee for oil contracts. From now on, the liquid assets were transferred to Turkey, while the newly treated gold returned to Venezuela. This orientation may be interpreted as being no longer founded on ideology, but on interest. Everything depends on who benefits. Simultaneously, Venezuela became the target of a destabilisation campaign which began with the guarimbas demonstrations, continued with the attempted coup d’etat on 12 February 2015 (« Operation Jericho »), then by a series of attacks on the national currency, and organised emigration. In this context, Turkey offered Venezuela the possibility of avoiding US sanctions. The exchanges between the two countries multiplied fifteen-fold in 2018. Whatever the evolution of the Venezuelan régime, nothing can justify what is being prepared against its population.
Coordination of logistical means
From 31 July to 12 August 2017, SouthCom organise a vast exercise with more than 3,000 men from 25 allied states, including France and the United Kingdom. The goal was to prepare a swift landing for troops in Venezuela [6].
Colombia
Colombia is a state, but not a nation. Its population lives geographically separate according to social class, with enormous differences in the quality of life. Almost no Colombian has ever spent time in a neighbourhood attributed to another social class than their own. This strict separation has made possible the multiplication of paramilitary forces and consequently armed interior conflicts which have caused more than 220,000 victims in thirty years. In power since August 2018, President Iván Duque has challenged the fragile peace concluded with the FARC by his predecessor, Juan Manuel Santos – but not with the ELN. He has not dismissed the option of a military intervention against Venezuela. According to Nicolas Maduro, the United States are currently training 734 mercenaries in a training camp situated in Tona with a view to carrying out a false flag operation intended to spark a war with Venezuela. Taking into account the sociological particularity of Colombia, it is impossible to determine with certainty whether or not the training camp is controlled by Bogota.
Guyana
In the 19th century, the colonial powers agreed to a frontier between British Guyana (presently Guyana) and Dutch Guyana (presently Surinam). but no text has ever defined the frontier between the British zone and the Spanish zone (presently Venezuela). Consequently, Guyana administrates 160,000 km2 of forest which is still a source of dispute with its larger neighbour. By virtue of the Geneva agreement of 17 February 1966, the two states deferred to the Secretary General of the UNO (at that time the Burmese U Thant). Nothing has changed since then – Guyana has proposed to bring the case before the UNO** Permanent Court of Arbitration, while Venezuela prefers direct negotiations. This territorial dispute does not seem particularly urgent, because the contested area is an uninhabited forest which was believed to be without value – however, it is a huge area which represents two thirds of Guyana. The Geneva agreement has been violated 15 times by Guyana, which specifically authorised the exploitation of a gold mine. Above all, the stakes were raised in 2015 with the discovery by ExxonMobil of oil deposits in the Atlantic Ocean, particularly in the territorial waters of the contested zone. The population of Guyana is composed of 40 % Indians, 30 % Africans, 20 % mixed race and 10 % American Indians. The Indians are a strong presence in the civil services and the Africans in the army.
On 21 December, a vote of no confidence was lodged against the government of President David Granger, a pro-British, anti-Venezuelan General, in power since 2015. To everyone’s surprise, a deputy, Charrandas Persaud, voted against his own party, and in an atmosphere of indescribable chaos, provoked the fall of the government which had only a one-vote majority. Since then, the country is in a state of great instability – we do not know whether President Granger, who is presently undergoing chemotherapy, will be able to handle current affairs, while Charrandas Persaud left Parliament with an escort, via a back door, and has fled to Canada. On 22 December 2018, in the absence of a government, the Ramform Tethys (under the flag of the Bahamas) and the Delta Monarch (Trinidad and Tobago) undertook submarine explorations in the contested zone on behalf of Exxon-Mobil. Considering that this intrusion violated the Geneva agreement, the Venezuelan army chased the two ships away. The Guyanese Minister for Foreign Affairs, working with current affairs, declared it a hostile act. The United Kingdom Minister for Defense, Gavin Williamson, declared to the Sunday Telegraph on 30 December 2018 that the Crown was putting an end to decolonisation, which had been Whitehall’s doctrine since the Suez affair in 1956. London is preparing to open a new military base in the Caribbean (for the moment the UK has bases only in Gibraltar, Cyprus, Diego Garcia and on the Falkland islands). The new base could be situated on Montserrat (West Indies), or more probably in Guyana, and should be operational in 2022 [7]. Guyana is a neighbour of Surinam (Dutch Guyana). Its President, Desi Bouterse, is wanted in Europe for drug trafficking – an affair which pre-dated his election. But his son, Dino, was arrested in Panama in 2013, despite the fact that he entered that country under a diplomatic passport. He was extradited to the United States where he was sentenced to 16 years of prison for drug trafficking – in reality because he was setting up the Lebanese Hezbollah in Surinam.
The baptism of Jair Bolsonaro in the waters of the Jordan (Israël) (opvallend hoe goed het christelijk geloof het meestal kan vinden met fascisten….)
Brazil
In May 2016, Henrique Meirelles, the Minister of Finance for the transitional government of Libano-Brazilian Michel Temer, nominated Israelo-Brazilian Ilan Goldfajn as director of the Central Bank. Mereilles had also presided the Committee for the preparation of the Olympic Games, calling on Tsahal to coordinate the Brazilian army and police, thus guaranteeing the security of the Games. Simultaneously controlling the Central Bank, the army and the police of Brazil, Israël had no difficulty in supporting the popular movement of dissatisfaction in the face of the incompetence of the Workers’ Party. Believing – without any solid proof – that Presidente Dilma Rousseff had fudged the public accounts in the context of the Petrobras scandal, the parliamentarians impeached her in August 2016.
During the Presidential election of 2018, candidate Jair Bolsonaro went to Israël to be baptised in the waters of the Jordan, and consequently obtained a massive percentage of the evangelical vote. He was elected with General Hamilton Mourão as his Vice-President. During the period of transition, Mourão declared that Brazil should prepare to send men to Venezuela as a « peace force » once President Maduro had been overthrown – comments which constitute a barely-disguised threat which President Bolsonaro attempted to downplay.
In an interview on 3 January 2019, on the TV channel SBT, President Bolsonaro spoke of negotiations with the Pentagon concerning the possibility of creating a US military base in Brazil. This declaration raised powerful opposition within the armed forces, for whom their country is capable of defending itself without assistance.
Benjamin Netanyahu during the investiture of President Bolsonaro. Israël has taken position in Brazil.
During his investiture on 2 January 2019, the new President welcomed Israëli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This was the first time that an Israëli personality of this importance had been to Brazil. On this occasion, President Bolsonaro announced the coming transfer of the Brazilian embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who also went to the investiture, where he met Peruvian Minister for Foreign Affairs Néstor Popolizio, announced with President Bolsonaro his intention to fight with him against the « authoritarian régimes » of Venezuela and Cuba. Returning to the United States, he stopped over in Bogota to meet with Colombian President Iván Duque. The two men agreed to work for the diplomatic isolation of Venezuela. On 4 January 2019, the 14 States of the Lima Group (including Brazil, Colombia and Guyana) met to agree that Nicolas Maduro’s new mandate, which begins on 10 January, is « illegitimate » [8]. This communiqué has not been signed by Mexico. Apart from this, six of the member-States lodged a complaint with the International Criminal Tribunal*** against President Nicolas Maduro for crimes against humanity. It is perfectly clear today that the process towards war is under way. Enormous forces are in play, and there is little that can be done to stop them now. It is in this context that Russia is studying the possibility of setting up a permanent aero-naval base in Venezuela. The island of La Orchila – where President Hugo Chávez was held prisoner during the coup d’etat of April 2002 – would enable the storing of strategic bombers. This would constitute a much greater threat to the United States than the Soviet missiles stationed in Cuba in 1962. Thierry Meyssan, Political consultant, President-founder of the Réseau Voltaire (Voltaire Network). Latest work in French – Sous nos Yeux. Du 11-Septembre à Donald Trump (Right Before our Eyes. From 9/11 to Donald Trump). Translation – Pete Kimberley This article was originally published by “Voltaire Network“ – Notes [1] « Plan to overthrow the Venezuelan Dictatorship – “Masterstroke” », Admiral Kurt W. Tidd, Voltaire Network, 23 février 2018. “The United States “Master Stroke” against Venezuela”, by Stella Calloni; “The United States are preparing a war between Latin-American states”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network, 17 May and 18 December 2018. [2] The Pentagon’s New Map, Thomas P. M. Barnett, Putnam Publishing Group, 2004. “The US military project for the world”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network, 22 August 2017. [3] “Declaration of a National Emergency with Respect to Venezuela”, “Executive Order – Blocking Property and Suspending Entry of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Venezuela”, by Barack Obama, Voltaire Network, 9 March 2015. [4] « Brexit : Londres assume sa nouvelle politique coloniale », Réseau Voltaire, 3 janvier 2019. [5] “Assad and Chávez call for the creation of a Free Allied Movement”, Voltaire Network, 29 June 2010. [6] “Large-scale manoeuvres encircling Venezuela”, by Manlio Dinucci, Translation Anoosha Boralessa, Il Manifesto (Italy) , Voltaire Network, 23 August 2017. [7] “We are opening new overseas bases to boost Britain”, Christopher Hope, Sunday Telegraph, December 30, 2018. [8] “Declaration of the Lima Group”, Translation Anoosha Boralessa, Voltaire Network, 4 January 2019.
========================================== * Afgelopen week werd bekend gemaakt dat het VS ambassade personeel dat middels ‘een sonisch wapen’ onwel werd, waar men in de westerse pers al flink tamtam over maakte en met de beschuldigende vinger naar de Cubaanse regering wees, in werkelijkheid werd ‘aangevallen’ door het geluid van (echte) baltsende krekels…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!
** UNO (United Nations Organisation) >> nu kortweg UN of het Nederlandse VN.
*** Naar grote waarschijnlijkheid doelt de schrijver op het Internationaal Strafhof (ICC) in Den Haag.
Weer eens een staaltje ongelofelijk maar waar: de 15 activisten die op 28 maart 2017 verhinderden dat een vliegtuig voor deportatie van vluchtelingen kon opstijgen van de Britse luchthaven Stansted, zijn aangeklaagd voor terrorisme…… De Stansted 15, zoals deze mensenrechtenactivisten sindsdien worden genoemd, zijn mensen uit 3 verschillende vreedzame actiegroepen, t.w.: End Deportations, Plane Stupid en Lesbians and Gays Support the Migrants.
De Stansted 15 hebben geen geweld gebruikt en blijkbaar vindt men een dergelijke geweldloze actie in Groot-Brittannië een daad van terreur……. Waar deze groep zou moeten worden geprezen voor de juiste, niet gewelddadige inzet!
De deportaties vinden plaats zonder enig toezicht van mensenrechtenorganisaties en te vrezen valt dat mensen met grof geweld worden uitgezet, zeker gezien de voorbeelden uit het verleden (overigens ook door onze overheid….). De veiligheidsbeambten die de vluchtelingen vanuit GB begeleiden staan bekend om het gebruik van grof geweld…… Om de publieke opinie niet tegen zich te krijgen zorgt de Britse overheid ervoor dat de deportaties van vluchtelingen altijd midden in de nacht plaatsvinden…….
Niet alleen in Groot-Brittannië, maar overal worden de strafeisen en straffen van dit soort activisme opgeschroefd, echter dit slaat wel alles van wat we hebben meegemaakt, althans in de westerse wereld……… Te vrezen valt dan ook dat na het uitspreken van de straf op 4 februari 2019, men ook elders nog zwaarder zal gaan straffen…….
Het zal toeval zijn, maar het is wel opvallend dat de strafeis tegen de Stansted 15 net na het meer dan lamme overleg in Marrakech over ‘de vluchtelingencrisis’werd uitgesproken, een overleg wat leidde tot het volkomen overbodige Marrakech pact…… Een pact waar geen rechten aan kunnen worden ontleend, maar waarbij men weer eens publiekelijk de handen in het bloed van duizenden omgekomen vluchtelingen heeft gewassen…….
Daar er in het Marrakech pact een aantal keren werd gesproken over het tegengaan van vluchtelingenstromen, is de kans levensgroot dat regeringen zich achter dit pact zullen verschuilen, als zij weigeren vluchtelingen op te nemen……..
Nergens in het Marrakech pact wordt gesproken over het tegengaan van vluchtelingenstromen, door westerse landen te veroordelen die illegaal oorlog voeren tegen landen in het Midden-Oosten en Noord-Afrika, oorlogen geleid door de VS met hulp van haar NAVO partners, waar de VS in feite het opperbevel heeft over diezelfde NAVO……..
Intussen stuurt men mensen terug die grote kans lopen vermoord te worden, zoals een lesbische vrouw, wiens man al heeft gezegd haar te zullen opwachten na deportatie, hoogstwaarschijnlijk om haar te vermoorden……… Om nog maar te zwijgen over de vluchtelingen die teruggestuurd worden naar Afghanistan en Irak, omdat Buitenlandse Zaken met rammelende rapporten (ambtsberichten) komt die stellen dat men veilig is in die landen…….
De verantwoordelijken voor illegale oorlogen die vluchtelingenstromen op gang brachten en brengen, die bovendien het gore lef hebben vluchtelingen te weigeren, zouden terecht moeten staan wegens ernstige mensenrechtenschendingen en het moedwillig in levensgevaar brengen van mensen…….. Verantwoordelijken van landen die in feite direct schuldig zijn aan de dood van de vele duizenden die in de Middellandse Zee en de Egeïsche Zee zijn verdronken! Zoals je al had begrepen zijn de verantwoordelijken voor de enorme vluchtelingenstromen de VS en andere NAVO-lidstaten (inclusief Turkije), met hulp van Saoedi-Arabië, de Golfstaten, Egypte en Marokko.
De hoogste tijd dat het Internationaal Strafhof wordt uitgebreid en zich meer gaat roeren in de media met beschuldigingen aan het adres van bijvoorbeeld de VS en de andere NAVO-lidstaten!
Hoe is het mogelijk dat mensen die zich inzetten voor mensenrechten en die de dood van vluchtelingen willen voorkomen, worden aangeklaagd door het Britse openbaar ministerie, een ministerie dat tegelijkertijd geen actie onderneemt tegen het elders illegaal oorlogvoeren (één van de ergste vormen van terreur!) door haar eigen overheid, waardoor alleen deze eeuw al 2,5 miljoen mensen zijn vermoord…….
De wereld alweer totaal op de kop!!
ACTIVISTS WHO STOPPED DEPORTATION FLIGHT CONVICTED OF TERRORISM CHARGE, FACE LIFE IN PRISON
United Kingdom (NM) – A group of 15 activists who prevented a deportation charter flight from leaving Stansted airport by locking themselves together around the aeroplane have been found guilty of a terrorist offence.
The so-called Stansted 15 spent nine weeks on trial charged with an offence that has never been used before in response to a non-violent direct action and carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.
They were convicted by a jury at Chelmsford Crown Court on Monday 10 December and will be sentenced on 4 February 2019.
Ben Smoke, who was arrested after being cut away from the front wheel of the aeroplane, said the guilty verdict would have “huge ramifications on the ability of people to engage in what is a very long tradition of direct action in this country”.
The 27-year-old told Novara Media:
“I’m obviously terrified for myself, terrified for what the future holds, but more than that I’m terrified about how we carry on fighting a government that just won’t listen, how we carry on fighting a government that has been proven to be so disgusting and despicable every way you turn.
“You look at the UN report that came out recently that said that austerity is a choice, they have made a choice to kill 120,000 people, if we’re in a situation where we can’t fight that how do we go on? How do we carry on? How do we change our society?”
The activists, from campaign group End Deportations, were originally charged with criminal damage and aggravated trespass after the action on 28 March 2017, offences too small to warrant trial by jury and carrying a maximum of just three months in prison. The prosecution later sought special permission to add an additional charge of “endangering safety at an aerodrome”, a terrorism offence created in response to the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, in which 270 people died.
They stood accused of putting the safety of the airport and passengers at risk and causing serious disruption to international air travel for taking part in the non-violent direct action, in a move Amnesty International described as “using a sledgehammer to crack a nut”. The human rights organisation, which observed the trial for its duration, was concerned that the severe and unprecedented charge may have been brought in order to discourage other activists from taking non-violent direct action in defence of human rights.
Labour’s Shadow Attorney General Shami Chakrabarti condemned the verdict on Monday, pointing out that it coincided with the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
“What a sad International Human Rights day, when non-violent protestors are prosecuted for defending the Refugee Convention, and are treated like terrorists,” she said . “Labour in Government will review the statute book to better guarantee the right to peaceful dissent.”
Smoke said he believed the verdict could violate “the contract of our democracy” by obstructing channels that should be available for everyone to demand change.
He referenced the harsh sentences given to the suffragettes when they used direct action to challenge laws preventing women from voting in the early 20th century and said he feared the outcome of the Stansted 15 trial would have the same deterrent effect. “These people are people who were denigrated at the time and now are being heralded as heroes,” he said. “I’m not for a second trying to put us in that category but what they then experienced… imprisonment and being force fed, really, really meant that it became a harder thing to do to take a direct action to try and change the society you live in and to try and make society better… that’s what I’m terrified of seeing coming out of this action.”
Wearing pink bobble hats, hi-vis vests and jumpers emblazoned with the words “mass deportations kill, no one is illegal”, the coalition of activists from End Deportations, Plane Stupid and Lesbians and Gays Support the Migrants, chained themselves to a plane set to deport 60 people to West Africa on 28 March 2017 and stopped it from taking off.
In protesting against the injustices of the UK border and immigration system, the group focused their efforts specifically on the issue of mass deportation charter flights on account of the flights being the hardest form of deportation to individually resist. End Deportations campaigners argue that the flights were introduced by the government for that very reason.
Activist Helen Brewer explained that the group spent months considering the best and safest way to blockade the flight. “After coaches arrive from detention centres they go into a private car park,” she said, “then you have the crew coming down from their hangar to ready the plane. So [we knew we had to act] before the coaches drive from the car park to the plane to board people… So that’s what we did.”
Strategically, Brewer said, it made sense to target the aeroplane itself because people may be taken from all over the country to be deported on a charter flight, “but there’s only one plane”.
Deportations used to take place on regular commercial flights. But when passengers and pilots started to object on moral and political grounds, the Home Office changed tack and begun chartering deportee-only planes.
Shrouded in secrecy, these planes leave from undisclosed locations in the middle of the night. By doing this, they are more insulated from public opinion and the kind of reputational pressures that caused Virgin Airlines to announce it would no longer assist the Home Office with forced deportations.
Notorious for their violence, the only people on the flights are deportees and security guards. With no independent monitoring or documentation of what takes place on the way to the airport, during the flight or after landing, deaths in transitare not unknown.
At the heart of the group’s decision to take action was the desire to protect vulnerable people from the myriad violences of the UK border regime.
In her closing statement, Mel Evans, one of the defendants who represented herself throughout the trial, said about the action:
“This was never about politics. It was always about people. We wanted people to be safe… And now some of them are safe, and they’re able to be with their families and be with the people they love. And that’s all we were trying to do.”
One manifestation of this violence is in the way the flights themselves are enacted. Chains and restraints are commonly used to subdue passengers, sometimes even fatally. In 2010, 46-year-old Jimmy Mubenga died of suffocation after being pinned down in his seat by G4S security guards, despite already being handcuffed from behind with his seatbelt on.
Beyond the immediate danger of being on the plane, there is also the issue of the potential further violence awaiting passengers when they arrive in the country they are being deported to. Addressing the jury, Evans read the testimony of one of the passengers on the flight:
“[There] was a lesbian woman who was terrified of what would happen if she saw her ex-husband: ‘[He] said he knows I am being deported next week. He is waiting for me. He is planning to kill me. I don’t want to go on that plane. I can’t go. I am begging.’”
But this is far from an isolated incident. According to Brewer, “a deportation happened on Tuesday to Nigeria and Ghana. This was one flight we stopped out of thousands.” Using this logic, each of these individual acts of violence is connected – part of what Luke de Noronha, aspokesperson for the End Deportations campaign, described as “the architecture of racialised border violence”.
‘WITHOUT THEIR ACTIONS I WOULD HAVE MISSED MY DAUGHTER’S BIRTH’
Out of the 60 people set to be deported on the flight, 11 are still in the UK as a result of the action. Two out of those 11 now have indefinite leave to remain and four have been referred to the National Referral Unit For Human Trafficking. Five are still waiting for their appeals to be heard.
Kevin*, one of the passengers on the flight, was set to be deported to Ghana where he lived up until his late teens. He has since been granted leave to remain.
As a young child, Kevin was left in the care of his abusive father after his mother moved to England, but once he had finished school in the mid 2000s, he was finally able to join her in London.
In the UK he successfully applied for indefinite leave to remain. However, this was revoked after he received a criminal conviction. As a result of the loss of his immigration status, he faced deportation and with it, the prospect of being forced to leave behind his elderly mother, pregnant partner and children.
For Kevin, the impact of the action was life-changing. He said:
“For me a crime is doing something that is evil, shameful or just wrong – and it’s clear that it is the actions of the Home Office that tick all of these boxes. The Stansted 15 were trying to stop the real crime being committed.
“Without their actions I would have missed my daughter’s birth, and faced the utter injustice of being deported from this country without having my [now successful] appeal heard.
“My message to them today is to fight on. Your cause is just and history will absolve you of the guilt that the system has marked you with.”
Indeed, current government policy is widely known as ‘deport first, appeal later’. An asylum decision-maker for the Home Office recently described the process as a “lottery” in which “pushy managers [tried to drive] results through fear and intimidation.”
‘EVERYDAY IS A FIGHT IN THE COURTROOM’
The nine week trial began on 1 October 2018 at Chelmsford Crown Court in Essex, during which seven of the 15 gave evidence. Despite allowing the defendants to give their political reasons for the action during the trial, Judge Christopher Morgan ruled that they could not rely on the defence that they acted to stop human rights abuses. However, one of the lawyers for the defence, Mr Wainwright, described them as having “a real and genuine concern for the sanctity of human life”.
Throughout the trial, the prosecution repeatedly deployed anti-immigration rhetoric in discussing the case. A “fence” became “a protective membrane” – there to stop unknown foreign bodies from passing through. While, in his closing speech, lawyer for the prosecution Tony Badenoch QC repeatedly referred to the activists as a “swarm” – a denigrative metaphor routinely deployed by right wing media and politicians in the migration debate.
Listening to the prosecution without being able to defend themselves was a constant source of frustration for the group. Speaking to Novara Media shortly before the trial ended, Brewer said:
“We have to be in court usually from ten until four everyday, in a windowless courtroom, under fluorescent lights, sitting silently in the dock. [We] can’t speak except through [our] barristers and [we] have to listen to someone talk about [us] and…what we did and interrogate that and really smear that and present to the jury something that most of us completely disagree with. It’s hard. And it’s hard when you’re constantly battling; everyday is a fight in the courtroom.”
Following Morgan’s summing up on 4 December, the Guardian has reported that barristers defending the 15 argued the jury should be discharged because the judge’s final words were so severe they amounted to a direction to convict.
The length of the trial, combined with the threat of life in prison, has had a negative impact on the mental and emotional health of the group.
Activist Laura Clayson said she had been prescribed anti-anxiety medication as a result of the stress of the trial. “Given that it’s been nearly 19 months since we took action, 15 since the charge was escalated to endangerment, and we have only just come out the other side of the trial, I haven’t even begun to be able to start processing or unpacking it,” she said. “Living with such uncertainty and precarity makes life incredibly difficult and it has been hard to function normally, to think ahead or plan anything. The trial has always been there, looming over us.”
they found us guilty. we’ll get sentenced 4th february. we’re reeling.. but whatever they do to us, it will never be as bad as the suffering the home office inflict on people every single day. we will keep fighting in solidarity with those people.
The 15 activists intend to fight the conviction. In a statement released after the verdict was announced the group said:
“We are guilty of nothing more than intervening to prevent harm. The real crime is the government’s cowardly, inhumane and barely legal deportation flights and the unprecedented use of terror law to crack down on peaceful protest. We must challenge this shocking use of draconian legislation, and continue to demand an immediate end to these secretive deportation charter flights and a full independent public inquiry into the government’s ‘hostile environment’.”
“Justice will not be done until we are exonerated and the Home Office is held to account for the danger it puts people in every single day. It endangers people in dawn raids on their homes, at detention centres and on these brutal flights. The system is out of control. It is unfair, unjust and unlawful and it must be stopped.”
The guilty verdict marks a huge blow to the landscape of UK activism at a time when there has been a concerted effort to clamp down on the right to protest. From today’s guilty verdict, which itself was only made possible by the use of an unprecedented terrorism charge, to the jailing of the so-called Frack Free Fourearlier in the year, the future of non-violent direct action in the UK is far from certain.
Kate Allen, Amnesty International UK’s Director said:
“It’s deeply disturbing that peaceful protesters who caused disruption but at no time caused harm to anyone, should now be facing a possible lengthy prison sentence. This whole case will send a shiver down the spine of anyone who cares about the right to protest in our country. Around the world, human rights defenders are coming under increasing attack. The UK should not be bringing such severe charges against those who seek to peacefully stand up for human rights.”
Meanwhile, the End Deportations campaign will continue its fight to abolish deportations and detention centres and end the violence of the UK border regime.
In November, women in Yarl’s Wood detention centre again went on hunger strike to protest against their indefinite detention, describing the experience of living in Britain’s only female detention centre as a form of “hell”. It is clear that activists like the Stansted 15 are vital in resisting the UK border regime alongside those who feel the full force of its violence.
*Identifying details have been changed to protect anonymity
This report prepared by Beth Perkin for Novara Media
Werkelijk te zot en schunnig voor woorden: maar de VS troepen langs de grens met Mexico hebben het chemisch wapen traangas ingezet tegen de ongewapende vluchtelingen uit hoofdzakelijk Honduras…. Onder die vluchtelingen bevinden zich ook kinderen, blijkbaar interesseert dat de autoriteiten in de VS niet, waarschijnlijk zien ze kinderen zelfs als potentiële misdadigers……. Terwijl de VS volgens de eigen wetten en internationale wetgeving (VN Vluchtelingenverdrag) asiel zou moeten verlenen aan mensen die vervolgd worden……..
Het kan altijd nog gekker als het over de VS gaat: de vluchtelingen uit Honduras, die meer dan 90% van de vluchtelingenkaravaan uitmaken, zijn in feite op de vlucht voor de fascistische regering in Honduras, die de VS (onder verantwoording van Hillary Clinton) na een staatsgreep in 2009 tegen de democratisch gekozen president van dat land heeft geïnstalleerd……… Deze figuur heeft de economie volledig naar de kloten geholpen en laat drugsbendes hun gang gaan met het geweld dat ze tegen de bevolking gebruiken, daarnaast heeft Honduras doodseskaders die politieke en milieuactivisten en/of hun aanhangers vermoorden………. Nogmaals: de VS is verplicht deze vluchtelingen op te nemen, helaas zal dit waarschijnlijk niet gebeuren…… Je vraagt je werkelijk af waarom andere westerse landen de VS nog serieus nemen en zich zelfs laten gebruiken als moordenaars in de illegale oorlogen die dit land begint waar het maar uitkomt….. Afgelopen nacht hoorde ik op BBC World Service radio dat de VS sancties treft tegen de Nicaraguaanse minister van financiën, o.a. vanwege mensenrechtenschendingen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! De VS doet zelf niet anders dan mensenrechten schenden, niet alleen vanwege de totaal illegale gijzeling (dubbelop, ik weet ‘t) van verdachten (ofwel mensen die niet zijn veroordeeld!) op Guantanamo Bay, of in de illegale oorlogen die deze terreurentiteit voert, maar ook vanwege de omgang met vluchtelingen, waarbij de VS zelfs kinderrechten keer op keer schendt….. Voorts onderhoud de VS uitermate goede banden met de grote mensenrechtenschenders Israël, Saoedi-Arabië (door VS gesteund bij de Genocide die deze terreurstaat aanricht in Jemen…), de Golfstaten, Egypte, de Filipijnen en ga nog maar even door, zonder ook maar één keer te malen over mensenrechtenschendingen……
Over illegale oorlogen gesproken: wanneer gaat de wereld eindelijk inzien dat de VS als de donder terug moet in haar hok en daar de komende 200 jaar moet blijven, de grootschalige terreur van deze vereniging van schoftenstaten is niet met 10.000 pennen te beschrijven, zo maakte deze terreurentiteit sinds het einde van WOII tot nu toe al een ‘kleine’ 22,5 miljoen slachtoffers….* Genoeg is genoeg, yankee go home!!! (and stay there!) Tear Gassing Children Is Outrageous”: US Condemned for Violence Against Asylum Seekers
(CD) — As legal experts and human rights advocates overnight and Monday morning continued to denounce the tear gassing of children and other asylum seekers by U.S. forces at the Mexico border on Sunday, Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was among Democratic lawmakers who slammed the Trump administration for its treatment of refugees as she issued a reminder that vulnerable people fleeing violence and persecution have the right, codified by domestic and international law, to apply for asylum protection.
Asking to be considered a refugee & applying for status isn’t a crime.
It wasn’t for Jewish families fleeing Germany. It wasn’t for targeted families fleeing Rwanda. It wasn’t for communities fleeing war-torn Syria. And it isn’t for those fleeing violence in Central America.
“The migrants at our southern border include mothers and small children exercising their legal, human right to seek asylum,” declared the ACLU in a tweet on Monday morning, and told the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, “Tear gassing children is outrageous and inhumane.”
As the Guardian reports, this is what it looked like:
The National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (NNIRR) said that with asylum seekers, including children, being choked by tear gas along the U.S. border with Mexico, “a humanitarian crisis becoming even more inhumane.” Echoing Ocasio-Cortez and other rights groups, NNIRR emphasized that both “U.S. and international laws say these migrants have the right to apply for asylum.”
Adding this perspective, Karen Attiah, global opinions editor for theWashington Post, tweeted:
This is how American media would describe this if this happened in a non western country:
“American security forces under the Trump regime used *chemical weapons* in a cross border operation against unarmed asylum seekers, including children. “
Meanwhile, as Trump continued to demonize the migrants and refugees in Mexico—”many of whom are stone cold criminals,” he claimedwithout evidence Monday morning—Guardianjournalist Bryan Mealer and photographer Hans-Maximo Musielik, who have travelled extensively with refugees that left Honduras months ago, published an up-close-and-personal accountshowing how “the most vulnerable among them,” risked their lives—braving terrifying and dangerous conditions—to reach safety.
Let op: deze plek is in het origineel ingeruimd voor een video die ik niet kan overnemen, zie daarom het origineel.
Weer heeft de VS burgerdoelen aangevallen in de Oost-Syrische provincie Deir ez-Zor en weer gaat het om de plaats Hajin, waarbij dit keer 40 burgers werden vermoord, veelal vrouwen en kinderen, zo berichtte Press TV afgelopen zaterdag…….. Twee dagen eerder werden 17 mensen van dezelfde familie vermoord bij een aanval van de VS coalitie…… Deze terreurcoalitie is volkomen illegaal in Syrië aanwezig, waarnaast deze aanvallen ook nog eens ernstige oorlogsmisdaden zijn, de bombardementen door de VS coalitie (NAVO leden….) kunnen niet anders worden gezien dan grootschalige terreur…….
Eerder vermoordde de VS terreurcoalitie al 6 burgers in dezelfde provincie en op 13 november j.l. maakte het Syrische ministerie van buitenlandse zaken bekend dat dezelfde VS terreurcoalitie 60 burgers heeft vermoord in de stad al-Shafaah…….
Het Syrische ministerie van buitenlandse zaken stelt voorts dat de VS coalitie met opzet Syrische burgers vermoord en daarbij ook nog eens het verboden chemische wapen witte fosfor gebruikt….. (de VS coalitie, bestaande uit de VS en andere NAVO leden, maakt zoals vanaf het begin van de VS bemoeienis, amper slachtoffers onder terreurgroep IS….) Het ministerie verlangt een internationaal onderzoek naar de oorlogsmisdaden van de VS coalitie en stelt daarbij dat alle resoluties van de VN-Veiligheidsraad t.a.v. Syrië op grote schaal worden geschonden, o.a. door:
het eerder genoemde vermoorden van Syrische burgers
het onnodig verlengen van de strijd in Syrië
het vernietigen van de Syrische infrastructuur, inclusief grote delen van steden en dorpen
het ondermijnen van de nationale integriteit en de soevereiniteit van Syrië……..
De westerse wereld staat op de kop staat als het reguliere Syrische leger burgerslachtoffers maakt en dat n.a.v. berichten die de ‘gematigde terreurgroepen’ (lees: psychopathische moordenaars, verkrachters en martelbeulen) laten verspreiden door o.a. het Syrisch Observatorium voor Mensenrechten (SOHR)…… Berichten die voor het overgrote deel niet kunnen worden gecontroleerd en bij controle ‘iets te vaak’ op leugens blijken te berusten…….. Terwijl diezelfde westerse wereld continu wegkijkt als de VS terreurcoalitie de ene slachting na de andere aanricht onder Syrische burgers…… (nogmaals: bestaande uit NAVO lidstaten o.l.v. de VS, de grootste terreurentiteit op aarde)
Dozens of civilians, mostly women and children, have been killed when the US-led coalition purportedly fighting the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group conducted fresh airstrikes against residential areas in Syria’s eastern province of Dayr al-Zawr.
Local sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Syria’s official news agency SANA that US-led military aircraft struck the village of al-Buqa’an on the outskirts of Hajin town on Saturday, leaving at least 40 people dead.
The development came only two days after 17 people of the same family lost their lives when US-led coalition fighter jets fired missiles into buildings in Albu Badran village.
Most of the slain civilians had apparently been displaced earlier from the nearby town of al-Baghuz in the Abu Kamal district of Dayr al-Zawr province. The town has recently witnessed fierce clashes between Daesh terrorists and militants from the Kurdish Democratic Union Party.
Separately on Thursday, US-led warplanes struck al-Susah village in the same Syrian province. Six civilians were killed and several buildings destroyed in the aerial attacks.
On November 13, the Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates condemned a recent airstrike by the US-led coalition against the eastern town of al-Shaafah, which left more than 60 people dead and injured, arguing that the massacre clearly pointed to the fact that members of the military alliance had no respect for moral values, international rules and regulations besides the lives of innocent civilians.
The ministry, in two separate letters, addressed to United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres and the rotating president of the UN Security Council Ma Zhaoxu, called on the Security Council to fulfill its responsibilities and stop US-led aerial assaults.
It also asked the world body to propose an international, independent and impartial mechanism to investigate the crimes being perpetrated by the US-led coalition.
The letters noted that the coalition was deliberately targeting Syria civilians and making use of internationally banned weapons, including white phosphorus bombs, in Syria.
The ministry stressed that US-led coalition airstrikes were meant to kill as many Syrian people as possible, prolong the ongoing Syrian conflict, destroy the country’s infrastructure and undermine its sovereignty and territorial integrity in flagrant violation of all UN Security Council resolutions on Syria.
The letters concluded that the embarrassing silence of the Security Council had encouraged the US-led coalition to kill more Syrian civilians and destroy their property.
The US-led coalition has been conducting airstrikes against what are said to be Daesh targets inside Syria since September 2014 without any authorization from the Damascus government or a UN mandate.
The military alliance has repeatedly been accused of targeting and killing civilians. It has also been largely incapable of achieving its declared goal of destroying Daesh.
===================================== Voor het origineel, inclusief een video van iets meer dan 2 minuten, een video die ik niet kan overnemen, klik op deze link.
De Syrische provincie Dayr al-Zawr is in de labels direct onder dit artikel te vinden onder de naam die Nederland aanhoudt: ‘Deir ez-Zor’.
: Kim Kyung-Hoon/Reuters)
