Samenzweringstheorie paniek wordt juist gevoed door ‘tegenstanders’ daarvan

Nicholas Levis heeft op CounterPunch een artikel geschreven waarin hij betoogt dat juist de figuren die complotten uitwerken, mensen aanwijzen als de makers van samenzweringstheorieën (of complottheorieën, wat je wilt), als deze het complot blootleggen die zij de rest van de bevolking willen opdringen. Het is als met de hysterie over fake news in de reguliere media (en politiek), waar journalisten zelfs durven te eisen dat er censuurmaatregelen moeten worden genomen tegen bepaalde sites op de sociale media, daar men fake news zou verspreiden……. Terwijl diezelfde media keer op keer fake news (nepnieuws) brengen, sterker nog: fake news brengen op basis waarvan illegale oorlogen zijn aangegaan door de VS, weliswaar aantoonbaar ingegeven door leugens van de geheime diensten van de VS, maar met grote graagte overgenomen door die reguliere (massa-) media……
Levis wijst dan ook niet voor niets naar de illegale oorlog van de VS tegen Irak, waar het volk (ook in de EU) werd voorbereid op deze oorlog met de hersenspoeling van het volk door politici en media met leugens als zou Saddam Hoessein, destijds president van Irak, geheime voorraden massavernietigingswapens in bezit hebben gehad….. Een enorme leugen waartegen VN-wapeninspecteur Blix als een Don Quichot tegen vocht, keer op keer liet hij de wereld weten dat Irak zelfs geen massavernietigingswapens kon hebben, al deze wapens waren vernietigd en men had bij wijze van spreken elke vierkante meter van het land onderzocht……
Ook Henk Hofland, die door de Nederlandse pers als belangrijkste journalist van de 20ste eeuw wordt vereerd, geloofde deze leugen en ventileerde die op de NRC, de ‘slijpsteen van de geest’ (eerder de overdosis morfine voor de geest)….. Let wel, ik zeg ‘geloofde’, echter Hofland moet dondersgoed geweten hebben dat dit een pertinente leugen was en toch stelde hij zich achter de illegale oorlog tegen Irak, wat hij tot zijn dood is blijven doen, ondanks dat deze leugen werd doorgeprikt….. (Hofland, de Nederlandse journalist van de 20ste eeuw… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!)
Alle terechte ontkenningen van Blix konden niet op tegen de leugens die de geheime diensten en de Bush administratie de wereld inbrachten, dit met grote hulp van de reguliere media die het volk opzweepten….. Gezien het voorgaande kan je deze zaak niet anders zien dan de grootste samenzweringstheorie van deze eeuw, waar belachelijk genoeg de tegenstanders van die illegale oorlog destijds complottheoriedenkers werden genoemd!!!!! Kortom de wereld op de kop…….

Dave Granlund – Editorial Cartoons and Illustrations » Bush & Cheney at 9-11 panel

Voorts merkt Levis nog op dat Irak werd beschuldigd van het deelnemen aan de 9/11 aanslagen en zonder enig bewijs herhaalden Bush en vooral Dick Cheney deze leugen….. Na verloop van tijd was het grootste deel van de bevolking in de VS ervan overtuigd dat deze leugen de waarheid was (en ook in de rest van het westen begon men deze leugen te geloven….) Belachelijk, daar de VS Al Qaida als organisatie had aangewezen die verantwoordelijk was voor de 9/11 aanslagen en als er iemand was die de schurft had aan Al Qaida was het Saddam Hoessein wel!!

Lees het uitstekende artikel van Levis en laat je nooit meer foppen met leugens als zouden mensen die de overheid en reguliere media kritisch volgen complottheoriedenkers zijn, niet voor niets kan je een groot deel van de beste journalistiek op de sociale media vinden….. De reguliere (massa-) media zijn organisaties die de belangen van de eigenaren van die media moeten behartigen, plutocraten die belang hebben bij oorlog, ziekten en het in stand houden van de huidige status quo (en daarmee de huidige neoliberale politiek) >> goed voor de aandelenportefeuilles en daarmee voor de winsten en nog grotere bankrekeningen!!!
September 16, 2020

Conspiracy Panic

by Nicholas Levis

The most consequential false conspiracy theory of the last twenty years in the United States centered on fabricated accusations raised against the Iraqi state in 2002-3. These claimed that Iraq maintained secret stores of “weapons of mass destruction” and intended to use them against the West, perhaps imminently. Most versions also insinuated the Saddam regime was involved in some vague manner in perpetrating the 9/11 attacks together with its sworn enemies, the jihadi movements then doing business as al-Qaeda. That is what the vice-president running the regime, Cheney, repeatedly said. His president, Bush, just repeated the magic words 9/11-Saddam-9/11-Saddam-9/11 for months, until it was taken to be true by enough people to allow a smooth start to the carnage. The claims were actively fabricated by officials and agents at several agencies of the U.S., UK and other national security states, by various client groups and allied journalists, and by freelance assholes looking to get a piece of the action. The fabricators knew they were lying, and they knew that they lied so as to sell a planned, unprovoked war of aggression to the American, UK, and other western publics. The resulting war destroyed a nation, led to more than a million deaths, and accelerated the establishment of an archipelago of torture centers under U.S. control.

In short, the “Saddam-WMD-9/11” conspiracy theory was a top-down psychological operation conducted by state-based agents against the public, and freely trumpeted by nearly all organs of the U.S. corporate media. It has been completely discredited, but rarely will you here it called a conspiracy theory. None of the perpetrators of the campaign have been prosecuted, and most have continued their career trajectories unhindered by their participation in this well-known crime. Today many of them have been embraced by the Democratic establishment as heroic fighters against Trump — the same Democratic establishment that always seeks distance from actual fighters against Trump.

The most consequential American conspiracy theories ever were the Red Scares of 1919-21 and the late 1940s and early 1950s. Both met with a degree of popular enthusiasm and broad fear-based assent, but both were initiated and run by state and corporate-based elements as top-down psychological operations against the public, specifically targeting the left, labor organizers, and journalists, celebrities or teachers who showed insufficient anti-Communist fervor. Both campaigns succeeded in transforming American society and politics in a right-wing direction, and helped in partly dismantling the progressive, leftist and honestly liberal movements of their times.

A recent conspiracy panic campaign, #Russiagate, presented a mythic (and facially laughable) explanation for how the Democrats managed to lose the unloseable 2016 election. It appears to have been intended to weaken or to knock Trump out of office. If so, it backfired completely, presenting a fictional distraction from the far-worse realities of the regime’s violent policies and incipient fascism. Every time that the ludicrous and byzantine accusations fell apart (predictably, in every case), Trump’s position was strengthened, and that of real opposition to Trump’s barbarities was weakened.

Given their failure to actually fight Trump on policy, and given the Democrats’ embrace of Bushian politics and Bush-era war criminals, austerity, and imperialism, and given their propping-up of a right-wing candidate who has his own degree of involvement in Trump-style nepotism and is visibly suffering from cognitive impairment, Trump would be cruising to reelection. Cruising, that is, except for the unpredictable factors of Covid, the Depression, and the open outbreaks of organized fascist street violence that he praises. And because a real opposition to this regime’s particular horrors exists, and has not surrendered. (If they lose, the Democrats will blame the real opposition, and are already doing so preemptively.)
Thus, for the moment, Trump is well behind in the polls, despite the four-year favor to him delivered by the #Russiagate operation with its demand for 24/7 coverage and predictable serial failures.

However, the #Russiagate conspiracy panic operation also succeeded, insofar as it has functioned to condition most Democratic-type liberals (and some of the left) to uncritically accept a xenophobic explanation for the rise of an all-American fascism, and insofar as it has gained much support among them for a bellicose, new-Cold War stance and widepread favor for censorship measures (run by private mega-corporations) to combat “propaganda” and “conspiracy theory.”

It cannot be known at this time, but the QAnon narrative appears likely to have also originated with an intel operation, or the action of a Trump-friendly outfit, with the design of casting noise over a story that sounds just like it, but is actually true. Trump, Bill Clinton and various celebrities and intellectual hooligans were all tied to the long-time human trafficking and rape-ring run by likely intelligence asset and “billionaire” Jeffrey Epstein. He was convicted, and his co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell stands accused. The operation’s apparent purpose was to gain material for political blackmail. Trump’s former labor secretary, Acosta, was formerly the Florida prosecutor who made a deal to allow the convicted Epstein to walk free in 2008, and to seal the records of his clients. It’s fine to condemn QAnon, but when you spend your hours talking about how ridiculous and hateful and wrong the story is, you are not talking about Epstein and Trump and Clinton (and the various other Epstein “friends”). You are not talking about or acting on a million other things that matter. From the perspective of the QAnon propagators, you are helping to promote and reinforce the ruse.

America, like many places, is home to fantastically, facially false grand conspiracy narratives positing that the political economy (so evidently managed by a ruling class of owners and corporations and policy-makers reigning over large instituions, who act mostly in the open) is secretly run by a single, smaller, invisible cabal of satanically-inclined mystery men who just want to do evil because they hate America, or maybe because they want to destroy Trump’s beautiful white race. There are many varieties of grand-global conspiracy theories, but they often pander to odious, hateful, and exterminationist politics. The latter are often modeled on the old European anti-Semitic blood libel, or, in fact, repeat the old European anti-Semitic blood libel.

Grand-global conspiracy narratives can appeal to a common socio-psychological make-up that hankers for denial and magic and simplicity, for stories that attribute social ills and human troubles to a corruption that can be theoretically excised, restoring a normality that never really existed as it is now imagined. In this they are akin to other quick-fix narratives, many of them based in religious dogmas (e.g. bad things happen because people reject Jesus and commit acts the Bible supposedly prohibits; or, to take a now-abandoned version, alcohol consumption is the true primary cause of social ills and prohibition can fix it). For most, the reality that their society is systematically rotten to the core, burning the planet, and heading for a predictable fall, and that any change to this reality must be revolutionary or will be nothing, is much harder to process, above all emotionally. It also subjects one to the accusation of radicalism, extremism, or “conspiracy theory.”

I dispute that very many people change their politics or prejudices or world-view as a result of exposure to one of the global-type conspiracy theories. On the contrary, these are devised to aggrandize and manipulate already-existing political tendencies. People tend to believe what they were long-ago conditioned to believe, and they tend to see what they believe. And remember, the most effective and consequential conspiracy theories in the modern milieu are rarely products of autopoeitic convergences of mass psychology. They almost always have original authors who know that they are inventing this shit, like QAnon.
They are the products of modern public relations and popular mood management.

Granting that grand-global conspiracy narratives exist, the use of the phrase “conspiracy theory” in American discourse has always been rotten as fuck. Whether true or not, whether or not believable or grounded in evidence, any claims that attribute malfeasance to the American ruling class and policy-making power elite, or to the actual owners and runners of a system in which high-level crime was long ago legalized, is derided as “conspiracy theory” by the very same ruling class, power elite, corporate media, punditry, and liberal-authoritarian establishment. However, claims that mirror the same narratives, but allege them against an officially designated enemy, are never called conspiracy theory. In fact, once the latter tales are circulated within the corporate news media, to question them comes itself to be classified as conspiracy theory. You are a conspiracy theorist if you reject the outlandish #Russiagate conspiracy theories. And, once called a conspiracy theorist, you are supposed to be automatically and forever discredited from participating in public discourse. Increasingly, you are seen as the bearer of a dangerous and contagious disease, associated loosely with all other persons categorized as “conspiracy theorists,” and treated as fair game for censorship.

Conspiracy panic is a propaganda weapon that props up an overall portrayal of the mass of the people (and especially critics of the ideological hegemony, of whatever stripe, good or bad) as ipso-facto stupid, preemptively discredited, crazy, unworthy of participation in discourse, and dangerous. Conspiracy panic nowadays is a go-to for liberals to deny and distract and divert to incremental bullshit, and not have to think about systemic irrationality, falsehood, evils and failures, and how most of the unfolding disasters — including Trump himself — are not aberrations or surprises but predictable and systemic. It’s easier and more comforting to affect being appalled at the stupidity of QAnon (or the supposed millions who were moved to vote for Trump only because they saw a “Russian” post online), and to virtue-signal that you are different from the dumb right-wing patsies who eat that shit up, than to spend too much time being aware that the billionaire and corporate and ensconced policy-making ruling class as a whole — their names are known and plastered in the headlines — is by definition a predator class, professionally incapable of mercy, with overwhelming power over the rest of us, acting in ways that guarantee capitalism and its “ways of life” will continue burning the planet, literally, until the ecosystem’s capacity to sustain the present human civilization and population collapses. Which, speaking in historical lengths, is imminent, and possibly no longer reversible. Fight this anyway.

To respond to this piece, complain about the omission of citations to Jack Bratich, Liz Franczak or Karl Marx, or to remind Nicholas Levis that he ought to follow his own advice, write to N24CP2020@gmail.com. (wat een maffe toevoeging!! waarom heeft CoutnerPunch dit niet voor publicatie overlegd met Levis??)

‘Met de kennis van nu’ >> een andere manier om te zeggen ‘wir haben es nicht gewusst’

De tot nu toe meest belachelijke premier van dit land, is zonder meer de gemuteerde CDA kleiaardappel Balkenende. Als hij in het nauw kwam door de volkomen verkeerde beslissingen die hij en z’n afbraakkabinet namen, heeft Balkenende, ik dacht, een paar keer het meer dan lamme excuus gebruikt: “Met de kennis van nu…..” en dat in de bedoeling >> met die kennis had ik destijds anders gehandeld…..

Balkenende zei dit onder meer na het rapport van de Commissie-Davids over de door hem en de Hoop Scheffer (plus natuurlijk de rest van het waardeloze Balkenende kabinet) gesteunde illegale inval in Irak. Terwijl Balkenende en de Hoop Scheffer, destijds minister van BuZa, al vele malen waren gewaarschuwd dit niet te doen…… Ze werden o.a gewaarschuwd door het team van VN wapeninspecteurs o.l.v. Blix, die het vuur uit z’n sloffen liep met de mededeling dat Irak geen massavernietigingswapens had en ze zelfs niet verstopt kon hebben…..

Overigens zei CDA opperschoft de Hoop Scheffer later dat hij geen spijt had van het steunen van de oorlog tegen Irak, zowel politiek als militair…. Terwijl hij toen al wist (of had kunnen weten) dat meer dan 1,5 miljoen Irakezen waren omgekomen door die illegale oorlog…… Deze oorlogsmisdadiger mag (zoals oorlogsmisdadiger Balkenende) les geven aan hoge scholen en universiteiten…… Als beloning mocht de Hoop Scheffer van de VS (destijds onder lijpo G.W. Bush) een paar jaar secretaris-generaal van de NAVO spelen…….*

Het voorgaande schoot onlangs nog eens door m’n hoofd toen ik weer eens de dooddoener hoorde van Duitsers die na WOII werden gevraagd naar de concentratiekampen: “Wir haben es nicht gewusst….’ Inderdaad deze uitspraken hebben dezelfde strekking. Meen trouwens dat zowel de grijnzende VVD hufter Rutte als PvdA grofgraaier Bos (afzonderlijk) ook al eens hebben gewezen op ‘de kennis van nu’, i.v.m. één van de vele door hen gemaakte blunders, leugens en/of andere oplichterij….

* De Hoop Scheffer ontkent deze bewering, echter hij werd secretaris-generaal in 2003, hetzelfde jaar dat Balkenende 1 politieke steun uitsprak voor de illegale oorlog van de VS tegen Irak, dit besluit werd overgebracht middels een bezoek van hem en Balkenende aan het Witte Huis, om 7 uur ‘s morgens, met de pet in de hand, aan de dienstingang van het Witte Huis….

Lichtgelovige ‘atheïst’ gelooft Russiagate leugens…..

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…….

Credulous Atheist Believes Evidence-Free Establishment Russia Narrative

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.

Listen to New Atheist guru @SamHarrisOrg faithfully accept @NewKnowledgeAI disinformation warrior @noUpside‘s claim that there’s no doubt Russia meddled in the 2016 election because “the intelligence agencies know it happened” https://t.co/GHf94ZAEtB HT @Whtaplpic.twitter.com/Hgf4PQzTA9

Dan Cohen (@dancohen3000) January 16, 2019

(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.

I really enjoyed speaking with Renee DiResta about information warfare. We live in interesting times…@noUpside https://samharris.org/podcasts/145-information-war/

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.

Silly Republican, as if a $100k social media campaign “could have affected the closely fought Senate race” in 2017.

Oh wait, that’s also the prevailing liberal supposition about a ~$100k Russian social media campaign in a 2016 presidential race. Never mind!

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.
____________________________
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. 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 new merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers.
Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2
Caitlin Johnstone | January 19, 2019 at 2:47 am |
Tags: atheism, neocon, Russia, Russiagate, sam harris | Categories: Article |

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.

** GRU = GROe (Nederland)
=================================
Zie ook:
Massamedia VS vallen keihard door de mand met ‘vers’ geschoten Russiagate bok >> publiek wordt om vertrouwen gevraagd

Jacht in VS op alternatief (echt) nieuws in volgend stadium: journalist wordt vastgehouden zonder aanklacht

NewsGuard, het nieuwste wapen van Big Brother VS tegen de alternatieve media

Netflix censureert aflevering van humoristisch programma, ‘na een geldig verzoek’ op grond van Saoedische wetgeving….

New York Times te kakken gezet met haar berichtgeving over Russische manipulatie voor midterm verkiezingen

Bedrijf dat voor ‘Russische bots’ waarschuwde, heeft een leger met nep-Russische bots


Waarom de burgers van de VS de illegale oorlogen steunen

Facebook: uit gelekte documenten worden de steeds veranderende regels voor censuur op dit platform openbaar gemaakt: Facebook als geheime tak van de VS overheid

Facebooks departement voor censuur: een hoognodige uitleg over een maatregel die alleen in een dictatuur thuishoort

Two More Spiegel Employees Out After Fake News Scandal ExpandsOfwel: het zoveelste ‘gevalletje fake news’, gebracht door de reguliere massamedia……..

Facebook censureert foto’s van verhongerende Jemenitische kinderen als ‘sexual content’

Google manipuleerde VS presidentsverkiezingen van 2016 en censureert niet alleen linkse/alternatieve sociale media

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

Google Maps veegt Palestijns gebied van de kaart

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

Russiagate sprookje ondermijnt VS democratie en de midterm verkiezingen

Bolsonaro, de fascistische nieuwe president van Brazilië, werd volgens Avaaz en fake news brengers als de NYT gekozen door manipulatie via WhatsApp

Facebooks zuivering van de alternatieve (nieuws) media staat nog in de kinderschoenen

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

The US military’s vision for state censorship

Israël en VS werken samen in tegenwerken van critici op beleid t.a.v. Palestijnen

Facebook censureert de waarheid over Columbus en de verovering van de Amerika’s…….

Facebook censuur gestuurd door het westers militair-industrieel complex en de NAVO in het bijzonder……….

Why the Coordinated Alternative Media Purge Should Terrify Everyone‘ (Tyler Durden op Zero Hedge)

First They Came for Alex Jones — We Told You We Were Next — We Were‘ (Matt Agorist op The Free Thought Project)

CNN, de grote brenger van ‘fake news!!!’

Facebook en Twitter verwijderen nu volledige accounts………

Facebook (en Twitter) onderdrukt meningsvorming door het verwijderen van (echt) onafhankelijke media

Wie het nieuws controleert, controleert de wereld……

Facebook en Twitter verwijderen de eerlijke journalistiek en oprechte opinie >> censuur…..

Facebook verlaat ‘tranding news’ voor ‘brekend nieuws’ van 80 reguliere mediaorganen, ofwel nog meer ‘fake news…..’

Facebook komt met nieuwsshows van betrouwbare media als CNN en Fox News…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Censuur op het internet met vliegende start in de VS, ‘het land van het vrije woord….’

Facebook en NAVO werken samen in censuur op niet welgevallig nieuws……

Facebook helpt Saoedi-Arabië: doodstraf door onthoofding van vrouw die het waagde kritiek te uiten…..

Aanval op alternatieve media ‘succesvol’: meer en meer sites worden van het net geweerd………

ThinkProgress eiste censuur van Facebook en werd inderdaad gecensureerd…. ha! ha! ha! ha!

VS staatscensuur op Facebook (ook in de EU)

Facebook stelt perstituee van New York Times aan als censuur-agent…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Het echte Facebook schandaal: manipulatie van de gebruikers en gratis diensten voor eertijds presidentskandidaat Obama…….

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook doneerde aan de politici die hem in de VS aan de tand voelden >> in het EU parlement maakte hij gebruik van megalomane EU politici…..

Facebook wil samen met door Saoedi-Arabië gesubsidieerde denktank censureren…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Media Too Busy Defending John McCain to Report the News That Actually Affects You‘ Onder andere aandacht voor PRISM.

Westerse massa misleiding in aanloop naar WOIII……

VS gebruikt sociale media om ‘fake comment’ te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel ‘fake news….’

Eis een nee tegen censuur op het internet!

Facebook e.a. hebben lak aan AVG (GDPR), misbruik persoonsgegevens gaat gewoon door…….

Jeremy Corbyn wordt gedemoniseerd als antisemiet…….

Facebook: verrijking van oliemaatschappijen en andere grote bedrijven, plus wereldwijde corruptie…….

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

Scott Ritter, voormalig VN-wapeninspecteur: Iran verdient de eer voor het verslaan van ISIS

In het hieronder opgenomen artikel, geschreven door voormalig VN-wapeninspecteur Scott Ritter en eerder gepubliceerd op The American Conservative, stelt hij dat niet de VS, maar vooral Iran de eer toekomt van het verslaan van IS in zowel Irak als Syrië…..
Ritter verhaalt over het ontstaan van IS en alle daarbij behorende gore spelletjes van de VS, waarbij hij de VS in feite beschuldigt van het beschermen van en samenwerken met IS, al was het alleen om Assad af te kunnen zetten en nu als stok tegen Iran te gebruiken…….. Intussen heeft IS al een paar aanslagen gepleegd in Iran (met de hulp van de CIA). Over de CIA gesproken: de VS heeft toegegeven dat het al jaren bezig is om de oppositie in Iran te steunen en op te zetten tegen de regering……. Zo zijn ook de zogenaamde opstanden die de laatste jaren in Iran plaatsvonden (uiterst gewelddadige ‘opstanden’), georganiseerd door de CIA…..
Scott Ritter was VN-wapeninspecteur voorafgaand aan de illegale oorlog van de VS tegen Irak in 2003. Keer op keer liet hij de VN, de reguliere (massa-) media en politici weten dat Irak niet langer de beschikking had over ‘massavernietigingswapens en dat dit uit en te na was onderzocht door hem en z’n team, waarbij Ritter uiteindelijk zijn gelijk haalde….. Lullig genoeg haalde hij z’n gelijk, pas lang nadat de VS Irak aanviel….* Deze illegale oorlog van de VS betekende de dood van meer dan nu al 1,5 miljoen mensen (in feite is de oorlog in Irak nog steeds gaande….)….. Ach ja, de VS: de grootste terreurentiteit op onze kleine aarde…….

Lees het volgende uitstekende artikel van Scott Ritter en oordeel zelf:

Iran Deserves Credit for the Ruin of ISIS

But is the U.S. now allowing its last remnants to survive in Syria to spite Tehran?

Until recently the United States viewed the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, as a major threat to regional stability in the Middle East. Barack Obama made it a mission to roll back ISIS’s territorial and propagandistic gain, and Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to “kick ISIS’s ass.” The United States expended considerable effort, both military and political, in a campaign to defeat the terror group in Iraq and, to a lesser extent, in Syria.
But there is also no doubt that the bulk of the effort came from Iran, not the United States. Without Iranian involvement, ISIS would still have a formidable presence in both Iraq and Syria.
ISIS was born out of the ashes of the American invasion of Iraq. Their rise was the logical extension of a process that saw the fabric of secular Sunni society torn asunder by an American occupier unwilling to further empower a Sunni ruling elite that had been loyal to Saddam Hussein. Washington failed to understand the resentment engendered within the Sunni community when Iraq’s Shia, some of whom were beholden to Iran, came to power.
Traditional Sunni tribal power structures were eviscerated as a result, only to be replaced with radicalized Sunni youths beholden to only themselves. Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) was al-Qaeda in name only—its mission wasn’t to export jihad to the West, but to free Iraq from the grips of an American and Iranian occupation.
America’s campaign against AQI never resulted in that movement’s destruction. Instead, the United States, in an effort to free itself of the burden of war created when it invaded Iraq in the first place, withdrew from Iraq in 2012, leaving the final phase of AQI’s destruction in the hands of the Iraqi government. This period coincided with the start of the civil unrest in Syria and the creation of a radicalized Islamist opposition to Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad. The willingness to cede large swaths of Syrian territory to Islamist forces as a means of destabilizing Assad created the conditions for the birth of ISIS in the deserts of both central Syria and western Iraq.
When ISIS advanced on the Iraqi cities of Ramadi and Fallujah, the American-trained and -equipped Iraqi army was unable to halt its advance. Soon the major city of Mosul fell to ISIS, and its forces pushed down the Tigris River valley to the outskirts of Baghdad.
The story of Iraq’s struggle to form a viable resistance to ISIS in the aftermath of the fall of Mosul is little known, and even less appreciated, by the United States. The formation of so-called “Popular Mobilization Forces,” or PMF—organized at the behest of Iraq’s senior Shia leadership, and trained, equipped, and led by Iran—was the single most important factor behind the halting of ISIS’s drive on Baghdad and its eventual eviction from Iraqi territory.
Western media have paid a disproportionate amount of attention to the actions of a select few American-trained Iraqi security forces, which, with ample support from U.S. airpower and advisors, helped end fighting in and around Mosul. All the while, they’ve ignored that the lion’s share of the fighting was done by the Iranian-directed PMF. This fact was not lost on the Iraqi people, many of whom (though not many of the Sunnis) hold the PMF in the highest regard. This sentiment has propelled many of the senior leadership of the PMF into political prominence in Baghdad.
For Iran, the ISIS phenomenon is not limited to Iraq. It is seen as part and parcel of a concerted effort undertaken by the United States, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf Arab nations to overthrow Assad in Syria, diminish the power and influence of Hezbollah in Lebanon, and roll back Iranian influence in both Syria and Iraq. ISIS’s geographic presence in Syria, concentrated as it was in the central and northeastern deserts, made it a secondary target compared to the al-Qaeda affiliates operating in and around Aleppo and Damascus.
As the Syrian government, with the assistance of Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah, gained the upper hand in the fight against the American- and Saudi-backed al-Qaeda groups, however, the importance of ISIS as a source of anti-regime resistance grew. While ISIS never had the power to challenge Damascus directly, the efforts undertaken by the Syrian coalition to defeat ISIS diverted resources needed in the larger fight. As such, the continued existence of a viable ISIS presence on Syrian soil was deemed an acceptable outcome by the United States as it sought to contain Iran’s presence on Syrian soil.
ISIS in Syria lingers on, despite the fact that U.S. military power could ensure its almost immediate elimination. The reason for the stay of execution is not entirely clear, but it could well be that the U.S. sees ISIS as a useful foil against Iran. Efforts by the United States to roll back Iran’s presence inside Syria have recently become more volatile in the wake of fiery rhetoric from senior Trump administration officials and actions undertaken by Iran to harden their positions. The American policy of Iranian rollback includes the re-imposition of economic sanctions and support for opposition groups opposed to the Iranian theocracy.
The latter point is very sensitive. This sensitivity has only been heightened by remarks from Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman suggesting that any struggle for influence between Riyadh and Tehran ought to take place “inside Iran, not in Saudi Arabia,” and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s encouraging Iranian Arab minorities to rise up in opposition to the Iranian government.
When gunmen linked to ISIS attacked a military parade in the Iranian city of Ahvaz, killing and wounding dozens, the Iranian government was quick to blame the United States and Saudi Arabia, among others, and promise retaliation in kind. This prompted National Security Advisor John Bolton to declare to Iran that “there will indeed be hell to pay” if Iran or its proxies attacked the U.S. or its allies.
A few days later, Iranian rockets were launched, not against American targets in Basra, but locations in Syria linked to ISIS. While the Iranian strike was in clear retaliation for the Ahvaz attack, the rockets were emblazoned with slogans hostile to the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. This made it clear that the strike was meant for a broader audience. Among those who took notice were the American forces located a mere three miles away from the targets struck by the Iranians.
Rising tensions and strong rhetoric, if not carefully managed, could easily lead to an unintended—and dangerous—escalation of hostilities. This could test President Donald Trump’s uncertain appetite for direct conflict. Moreover, the American effort to stir up an Iranian opposition could do more to unite competing power factions within Iran’s leadership, and unite Iranians behind that leadership, than to divide and weaken the Iranian polity. The Trump administration seems to operate under the delusion that Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, are operating in different spheres with somewhat disparate interests. U.S. efforts to drive a wedge between Rouhani and Khamenei will not only prove fruitless, but backfire, closing the door to any potential negotiations and cementing a hardline response that will have Rouhani, the IRGC, and the supreme leader united in their opposition.
The United States is engaged in a dangerous double game with ISIS that is not only hypocritical in the extreme—given the 9/11 attacks on American soil that precipitated this whole sorry affair—but counterproductive to American national security interests. It has both empowered and legitimized the very Iranian theocracy it seeks to contain.
Rather than relying on ISIS as a foil to blunt Iranian influence in Syria and terrorize its citizenry at home, the Trump administration should recognize the positive role that Iran has played in defeating ISIS. It should build upon that recognition to craft a wider regional peace process that both recognizes the realities inherent in Syria today and reduces the tensions that prompt Iran to lean forward in such an aggressive manner. Unfortunately, such thinking seems beyond the capabilities of Mike Pompeo and John Bolton. As such, America will continue to pursue poorly thought out policies with no chance of success without any thought to either cost or consequence.
Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD.

==================================
* Onbegrijpelijk maar waar, ondanks dat deze oorlog meer dan 1,5 miljoen doden heeft gekost, zijn er nog steeds politici die stellen dat deze oorlog gerechtvaardigd was, zoals CDA onderknuppel de Hoop Scheffer, die voor zijn steun aan deze illegale oorlog door de VS als zetbaas van de NAVO werd aangesteld…….. De reguliere westerse massamedia hoor je niet meer over de beginjaren van de oorlog tegen Irak, media die de leugens van de VS over de massavernietigingswapens hysterisch hebben uitgevent en de eerste jaren van de illegale oorlog tegen Irak, pal achter de VS bleven staan, waarbij ze een hele berg ‘fake news’ brachten, aangevuld met gezwets en leugens van opiniemakers……. Een smerig spel dat zoals gezegd was gebaseerd op leugens en bedrog, waarmee ze het grootste deel van het westerse volk achter deze schandalige illegale oorlog wisten te houden……… Vergeet niet dat ook wij Nederlanders via de belasting fiks hebben meebetaald aan deze oorlog, daar Nederland niet alleen in aanloop van deze illegale oorlog met een onderzeeboot inlichtingen verzamelde voor de VS, maar vervolgens gaf Nederland naast politieke steun, ook militaire steun aan deze oorlog, ofwel militairen op de grond….. Ook Nederlandse F16’s hebben lang steun verleend aan deze vuile oorlog, wat zeg ik: Nederland verleent nog steeds steun aan die oorlog met F16’s en met het trainen van het Iraakse leger……

Albright en Powell waarschuwen voor het taalgebruik van Trump…….. Ofwel de pot verwijt de ketel….

De twee oorlogsmisdadigers Albright en Powell, die beiden een levenslange gevangenisstraf zouden moeten uitzitten in Scheveningen*, waarschuwen voor de taal die Trump gebruikt….. Aldus werd afgelopen maandagmorgen in het Radio1 Journaal gemeld (rond 8.18 u.)

Beter had men meteen even gemeld dat het woordgebruik van psychopaat Albright van schofterigheid aan elkaar hangt, zo durfde deze oorlogshoer negatief te antwoorden op de vraag of ze spijt had van de sancties tegen Irak**, daar er destijds 500.000 Irakese kinderen zijn omgekomen door die sancties. Nee daar had Albright zoals gezegd niet de minste moeite mee en ze zou het zo weer doen……..

Powell zou ook beter de rest van z’n leven z’n mond houden, deze leugenaar overtuigde de VS volgzame schapen van de westerse politiek en massamedia, dat het Irak van Saddam Hoessein massavernietigingswapens had, een dikke vette leugen, waarvan Powell wel degelijk op de hoogte moet zijn geweest….. Al moet ik hier direct aan toevoegen dat veel van de westerse politici, precies als Powell, ordinaire lobbyisten waren voor het militair-industrieel complex en dat complex heeft baat bij zoveel mogelijk oorlog….. Hetzelfde geldt voor de reguliere westerse massamedia……

Powell had inderdaad op de hoogte moeten zijn, niet voor niets zocht VN wapeninspecteur Blix destijds keer op keer de media om te zeggen dat Irak geen massavernietigingswapens had….. Blix was leider van een team van deze inspecteurs en had meerdere missies geleid in Irak, die allen tot dezelfde conclusie kwamen: Irak had deze wapens niet en kon die niet meer hebben, gezien de uitgebreide inspecties die deze inspecteurs uitvoerden in Irak……. Echter i.p.v. te luisteren naar Blix werd hij als ondeskundig neergezet door de VS, een groot deel van de andere westerse politici en door de massamedia….

Door de leugens van Powell begon de VS een illegale oorlog tegen Irak, die intussen aan meer dan 1,5 miljoen mensen het leven heeft gekost…… (dit nog buiten een immense schade, die vooral door VS bedrijven wordt hersteld en dat op kosten van het Iraakse volk…..)

Het zou beter zijn als Trump z’n taal zou temperen, maar vertel dat maar eens aan een imbeciele psychopaat…… Eén ding is zeker (alweer zoals gezegd): massamoordenaars en oorlogsmisdadigers als Albright en Powell zouden vast moeten zitten voor het leven, waar geen persoon nog aandacht zou besteden aan hun hypocriete lulpraatjes…*

* Scheveningen, waar beiden zouden moeten zitten, na een veroordeling door het Internationaal Strafhof >> ICC. (waar ik aan toe moet voegen dat Trump in relatief korte tijd ook overrijp is voor eenzelfde levenslange straf wegens oorlogsmisdaden, die in die korte tijd al aan een enorm aantal burgers het leven heeft gekost…….)

** Tijdens het bewind van Albright op het VS ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken onder ‘democraat’ Clinton.

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

John C. O’Day publiceerde vorige week vrijdag een artikel op Fair.org dat ik overnam van Anti-Media (en dat je onder mijn schrijven terug kan vinden). Hierin vestigt O’Day de aandacht op de Iran-deal van een paar jaar geleden, deze deal of: the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), werd destijds bediscussieerd in de reguliere (massa-) media, waar men stelde dat Iran ofwel deze deal moest slikken, daar anders alleen oorlog met Iran zou overblijven als alternatief………

De voorspelling dat oorlog het enige alternatief zou zijn, werd door de Trump administratie gevolgd, door de deal alsnog af te blazen en met enorme anti-Iran propaganda te beweren dat Iran zich niet aan de deal houdt, ook al zeggen alle VN wapeninspecties dat Iran inderdaad is gestopt met de verrijking van uranium en is begonnen met het ontmantelen van de daarvoor benodigde centrifuges.

Bolton, de oorlogshitser en oorlogsmisdadiger (die voor het leven gevangen zou moeten zitten in Scheveningen) beweerde dat wanneer Iran de boel zou belazeren, het land te maken zou krijgen met ‘de woede van de VS’, ofwel met grootscheepse terreur in de vorm van één van de zwaarste oorlogsmisdaden, het beginnen van alweer een illegale oorlog door deze grootste terreurentiteit op aarde…………

Een belachelijke uitlating van Bolton daar de VS zonder enig bewijs en in tegenspraak met officiële VN rapporten toch al stelt dat Iran vals speelt, m.a.w.: de reden voor de VS om een (illegale) oorlog tegen Iran te beginnen, is door de VS zelf gecreëerd…….. (iets waar de VS ‘goed in is’, neem alle false flag operaties van deze terreurenteit)
O’Day stelt dat de woorden van figuren als Bolton en Trump nog amper op kritiek kunnen rekenen in de VS, wat volgens hem het gevolg is van de berichtgeving in de reguliere media……. O’Day noemt een groot aantal voorbeelden en stelt dan ook dat de Trump administratie die media volgt, echter daar ben ik het niet mee eens. O’Day vergeet het begrip Deep State, de werkelijke machthebbers, die al helemaal niet blij waren met de Iran-deal. Deze Deep State beheerst ook de massamedia en zijn derhalve verantwoordelijk voor wat die media brengen aan (nep-) nieuws, leugens en pure propaganda (waarbij Goebbels z’n gore vingers zou aflikken….)

Ondanks dat een groot deel van die media in onmin leven met Trump, staan ze volkomen achter de terreur die de VS verspreidt over het Midden-Oosten, Latijns-Amerika en Afrika……. Vergeet daarnaast niet dat het in feite niet uitmaakt wie er regeert in de VS, al helemaal niet wat betreft de buitenlandpolitiek, neem ‘vredesduif’ Obama die als eerste VS president de volle 2 termijnen in (illegale) oorlogen was verwikkeld met meerdere landen en er zelf (officieel) 2 begon….
Echter lees het artikel van O’Day en oordeel zelf; wat hij schrijft over de media is zonder meer feitenmateriaal (zoals je onder de links kan lezen):

Trump Administration Follows Corporate Media Playbook for War With Iran

October 5, 2018 at 8:03 am
Written by John C. O’Day
(FAIR.org) — Three years ago, as Americans debated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran—popularly known as “the Iran deal”—I highlighted a troubling media trend on FAIR.org (8/20/15): “For nearly all commentators, regardless of their position, war is the only alternative to that position.”
In the months since US President Donald Trump tore up the JCPOA agreement, his administration has been trying to make good on corporate media’s collective prediction. Last week, John Bolton (BBC, 9/26/18), Trump’s national security advisor and chief warmonger, told Iran’s leaders and the world that there would be “hell to pay” if they dare to “cross us.”

John Bolton (BBC, 9/26/18): “Let my message today be clear: We are watching, and we will come after you.”
That Bolton’s bellicose statements do not send shockwaves of pure horror across a debt-strapped and war-weary United States is thanks in large part to incessant priming for war, facilitated by corporate media across the entire political spectrum, with a particular focus on Iran.
Back in 2015, while current “resistance” stalwarts like the Washington Post (4/2/15)
and Politico (8/11/15) warned us that war with Iran was the most likely alternative to the JCPOA, conservative standard-bearers such as Fox News (7/14/15) and the Washington Times (8/10/15) foretold that war with Iran was the agreement’s most likely outcome. Three years hence, this dynamic has not changed.
Cartoonist Patrick Chappatte (New York Times, 5/10/18) presents Trump and Bolton’s “deal” for Iran.
To experience the full menu of US media’s single-mindedness about Iran, one need only buy a subscription to the New York Times. After Trump withdrew from the JCPOA, the Times’ editorial board (5/8/18) wrote that his move would “lay conditions for a possible wider war in the Middle East.” Susan Rice (New York Times, 5/8/18), President Barack Obama’s national security advisor, agreed: “We could face the choice of going to war or acquiescing to a nuclear-armed Iran,” she warned. Cartoonist Patrick Chappatte (New York Times, 5/10/18) was characteristically more direct, penning an image of Trump alongside Bolton, holding a fictitious new agreement featuring the singular, ultimate word: “WAR.”
On the other hand, calling Trump’s turn against JCPOA a “courageous decision,” Times columnist Bret Stephens (5/8/18) explained that the move was meant to force the Iranian government to make a choice: Either accede to US demands or “pursue their nuclear ambitions at the cost of economic ruin and possible war.” (Hardly courageous, when we all know there is no chance that Trump or Stephens would enlist should war materialize.)
Trump’s latest antics at the United Nations have spurred a wave of similar reaction across corporate media. Describing his threat to “totally destroy North Korea” at the UN General Assembly last year as “pointed and sharp,” Fox News anchor Eric Shawn (9/23/18) asked Bill Richardson, an Obama ally and President Bill Clinton’s ambassador to the UN, whether Trump would take the same approach toward Iran. “That aggressive policy we have with Iran is going to continue,” Richardson reassured the audience, “and I don’t think Iran is helping themselves.” In other words, if the United States starts a war with Iran, it’s totally Iran’s fault.
Politico (9/23/18), meanwhile, reported that Trump “is risking a potential war with Iran unless he engages the Islamist-led country using diplomacy.” In other words, if the United States starts a war with Iran, it’s totally Trump’s fault. Rice (New York Times, 9/26/18) reiterated her view that Trump’s rhetoric “presages the prospect of war in the Persian Gulf.” Whoever would be the responsible party is up for debate, but that war is in our future is apparently all but certain.
Politico’s article cited a statement signed by such esteemed US experts on war-making as Madeleine Albright, who presided over Clinton’s inhuman sanctions against Iraq in the ’90s, and Ryan Crocker, former ambassador for presidents George W. Bush and Obama to some of America’s favorite killing fields: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria. James Clapper, Obama’s National Intelligence Director, who also signed the letter, played an important role in trumping up WMD evidence against Saddam Hussein before the United States invaded Iraq in 2003. When it comes to US aggression, they’re the experts.
Vanity Fair (9/26/18) interviewed John Glaser of the Cato Institute, who called Trump’s strategy “pathetic,” and also warned that it forebodes war. In an effort to “one-up Obama,” Glaser explained, Trump’s plan is “to apply extreme economic pressure and explicit threats of war in order to get Iran to capitulate.” Sound familiar? As Glaser implies, this was exactly Obama’s strategy, only then it wasn’t seen as “pathetic,” but rather reasonable, and the sole means for preventing the war that every US pundit and politician saw around the corner (The Hill, 8/9/15).
When everyone decides that war is the only other possibility, it starts to look like an inevitability. But even when they aren’t overtly stoking war fever against Iran, corporate media prime the militaristic pump in more subtle yet equally disturbing ways.
Benjamin Netanyahu speaks for the Iranian people on CNN (9/29/18).
First among these is the near-complete erasure of Iranian voices from US airwaves (FAIR.org, 7/24/15). Rather than ask Iranians directly, national outlets like CNN (9/29/18) prefer to invite the prime minister of Israel, serial Iran alarmist and regional pariah Benjamin Netanyahu, to speak for them. During a jovial discussion this weekend over whether regime change and/or economic collapse is Iran’s most likely fate, Netanyahu explained to the audience that, either way,
The ones who will be happiest if that happens are the people of Iran.” No people of Iran were on hand to confirm or deny this assessment.
Bloomberg (9/30/18) similarly wanted to know, “What’s not to like about Trump’s Iran oil sanctions?” Julian Lee gleefully reported that “they are crippling exports from the Islamic Republic, at minimal cost to the US.” One might think the toll sanctions take on innocent Iranians would be something not to like, but Bloomberg merely worried that, notwithstanding the windfall for US refineries, “oil at $100 a barrel would be bad news for drivers everywhere—including those in the US.”
Another prized tactic is to whitewash Saudi Arabia, Iran’s chief geopolitical rival, whose genocidal destruction of Yemen is made possible by the United States, about which corporate media remain overwhelmingly silent (FAIR.org, 7/23/18). Iran’s involvement in Yemen, which both Trump and the New York Times (9/12/18) describe as “malign behavior,” is a principal justification for US support of Saudi Arabia, including the US-supplied bombs that recently ended the brief lives of over 40 Yemeni schoolchildren. Lockheed Martin’s stock is up 34 percentfrom Trump’s inauguration day.
Corporate media go beyond a simple coverup of Saudi crimes to evangelize their leadership as the liberal antidote to Iran’s “theocracy.” Who can forget Thomas Friedman’s revolting puff piece for the Saudi crown prince Mohammad bin Salman? Extensively quoting Salman (New York Times, 11/23/17), who refers to Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as “the new Hitler of the Middle East,” Friedman nevertheless remains pessimistic about whether “MBS and his team” can see their stand against Iran through, as “dysfunction and rivalries within the Sunni Arab world generally have prevented forming a unified front.” Oh well, every team needs cheerleaders, and Friedman isn’t just a fair-weather fan.
While Friedman (New York Times, 5/15/18) believes that Trump has drawn “some needed attention to Iran’s bad behavior,” for him pivotal questions remain unanswered, such as “who is going to take over in Tehran if the current Islamic regime collapses?” One immediate fix he proposed was to censure Iran’s metaphorical “occupation” of Syria, Iraq and Lebanon. Isn’t this ironic coming from an unapologetic propagandist for Washington’s decades-long, non-metaphorical occupation of the two countries to the east and west of Iran (FAIR.org, 12/9/15)?
In a surprising break from corporate media convention, USA Today (9/26/18) published a column on US/Iran relations written by an actual Iranian. Reflecting on the CIA-orchestrated coup against Iran’s elected government in 1953, Azadeh Shahshahani, who was born four days after the 1979 revolution there, wrote:

I often wonder what would have happened if that coup had not worked, if [Prime Minister] Mosaddeq had been allowed to govern, if democracy had been allowed to flourish.”
It is time for the US government to stop intervening in Iran and let the Iranian people determine their own destiny,” she beseeched readers.
Code Pink’s Medea Benjamin confronts the head of Trump’s “Iran Action Group” (Real News, 9/21/18).

Shahshahani’s call is supported by some who have rejected corporate media’s war propaganda and have gone to extreme lengths to have their perspectives heard. Anti-war activist and Code Pink founder Medea Benjamin was recently forcibly removed after she upstaged Brian Hook, leader of Trump’s Iran Action Group, on live TV, calling his press conference “the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen” (Real News, 9/21/18). Benjamin implored the audience: “Let’s talk about Saudi Arabia. Is that who our allies are?”
How dare you bring up the issue of Yemen,” admonished Benjamin as she was dragged from the room. “It’s the Saudi bombing that is killing most people in Yemen. So let’s get real. No more war! Peace with Iran!” Code Pink is currently petitioning the New York Times and Washington Post to stop propagandizing war.
Sadly, no matter whom you ask in corporate media, be they spokespeople for “Trump’s America” or “the resistance,” peace remains an elusive choice in the US political imagination. And while the public was focused last week on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s perjurious testimony, the Senate finalized a $674 billion “defense” budget. Every single Democrat in the chamber voted in favor of the bill, explicitly naming Iran as persona non grata in the United States’ world-leading arms supply network, which has seen a 25 percent increase in exports since Obama took office in 2009.
The US government’s imperial ambitions are perhaps its only truly bipartisan project—what the New York Times euphemistically refers to as “globalism.” Nowhere was this on fuller display than at the funeral for Republican Sen. John McCain (FAIR.org, 9/11/18), where politicians of all stripes were tripping over themselves to produce the best accolades for a man who infamously sang“bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran” to the tune of a Beach Boys song.
McCain’s bloodlust was nothing new. Nearly a hundred years ago, after the West’s imperial competition culminated in the most destructive war the world had ever seen, the brilliant American sociologist and anti-colonial author WEB Du Bois wrote, “This is not Europe gone mad; this is not aberration nor insanity; this is Europe.”
Iranian leaders have repeatedly said they do not want war with the US (AP, 9/27/18), but US corporate media, despite frequently characterizing Trump as a “mad king” (FAIR.org, 6/13/18), continue to play an instrumental role in rationalizing a future war with Iran. Should such an intentional catastrophe come to pass, we can hardly say that this would be America gone mad; war is not aberration, it is always presented as the next sane choice. This is America.
By John C. O’Day / Republished with permission / FAIR.org / Report a typo

======================================
Zie ook:
KLM vliegt na ‘risicoanalyse’ niet meer in luchtruim van Iran en Irak

Oorlog tegen Iran: VS heeft lak aan democratie >> Irak wordt gedreigd met sancties en ‘herstelbetaling’

VS moord op Qasem Soleimani is een oorlogsverklaring aan adres van Iran…….

Iraakse regering pissig over VS beschuldiging dat Iraanse bewind corrupt is

VS-anti-Iran conferentie in EU lidstaat Polen, ondanks EU verzet tegen VS sancties…..

Bolton ‘feliciteert’ Iran vanwege het 40 jarige revolutie jubileum met een oorlogsdreiging……


Trump gelooft zijn geheime diensten inzake Iran niet meer

Trump Warns Europeans Not to Defy US Sanctions Against Iran


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

Iran houdt zich aan nucleair verdrag, ondanks VS agressie

SWIFT betalingssysteem raakt monopolie (gelukkig) kwijt

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

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

The New Tyranny of the Dollar


VS vermoordt Iraniërs met sancties, EU doodstil…….

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

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

Iran, de protesten en wat de media je niet vertellen………

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


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

Protesten Iran opgezet door de VS en Israël


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



Iran: moderne oorlogspropaganda ingezet door VS tegen ‘ongehoorzaam land…’

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

Shock & Awe: 15 jaar geleden begon de (illegale) oorlog tegen Irak, dezelfde weg wordt weer gevolgd door de VS (en de massamedia)……..

15 jaar geleden begon de regering van George W. Bush de oorlog tegen Irak. Geheel op leugens gebaseerd was dit de aanzet tot een illegale oorlog die intussen aan meer dan 1,5 miljoen burgers het leven heeft gekost.

Deze oorlog was niet mogelijk geweest, als de reguliere (massa-) media niet de leugens van de Bush administratie hadden overgenomen en dat op de voorpagina’s en prominent in nieuws en actualiteiten uitzendingen, of dat nu op de radio of tv was. De term ‘fake news’ bestond destijds nog niet, maar werd wel degelijk op grote schaal gemaakt door de hiervoor genoemde media. Vergeet niet dat meerdere deskundigen en wapeninspecteurs van de VN, zoals Blix, keer op keer stelden dat Irak niet meer in het bezit was van massavernietigingswapens…….
Het volgende artikel gaat Ron Paul dieper in op alle gevolgen van deze illegale oorlog die de VS 15 jaar geleden begon. Voorts noemt hij het huidige tromgeroffel o.l.v. De VS tegen Noord-Korea, waar senator Graham een paar dagen geleden stelde dat een paar miljoen doden geen probleem zijn, als met een oorlog tegen dit land ‘stabiliteit’ in de regio wordt bereikt………..
Jammer dat Paul niet alle andere oorlogsdreigingen van VS en NAVO zijde noemt, zoals een dreigende oorlog tegen Syrië, Iran en Libanon (deze o.l.v. Israël met steun van de VS), waar nog Oekraïne aan toegevoegd kan worden, daar de VS daar niet alleen meer ‘militaire adviseurs’, maar ook zware wapens levert aan dit intussen zo goed als failliete land. Dit nog buiten alle militaire oefeningen langs de Russische grens, waar de VS in feite oefent op een oorlog tegen Rusland…….

Hetzelfde geldt voor China, waar de VS dit land voor een groot deel heeft omringd met militaire bases en waar de Trump administratie dit land meer en meer met militair geweld bedreigt (zoals over de eilandjes die China claimt in de Zuid-Chinese Zee…)…….

Ron Paul: 15 Years After the US Invaded Iraq, It’s Time to Listen to the Iraqi People

March 5, 2018 at 1:04 pm
Written by Ron Paul
(RPI Op-ed)This month marks the 15th anniversary of the US war on Iraq. The “shock and awe” attack was launched based on “stove-piped” intelligence fed from the CIA and Pentagon through an uncritical and compliant US mainstream media. The US media was a willing accomplice to this crime of aggression committed by the George W. Bush Administration.
Despite the lies we were constantly bombarded with, Iraq never presented a threat to the United States. Iraq never had the weapons of mass destruction that the neocons used to frighten Americans into supporting the war. How many of them knew all along that there were no WMDs? We’ll never know. Attacking Iraq and overthrowing its leader was long a plan in the neocon playbook and they used the 9/11 attack on the US as an excuse to pull the plan off the shelf and put it into action.
The US “regime change” war on Iraq has directly resulted in the death of at least a quarter of a million civilians, and indirectly perhaps a million Iraqis have been killed. The Iraqi infrastructure was destroyed and the country was set back many decades in development. Far from the democratization we were promised, Iraq has been turned into a hell on earth. Due to the US use of depleted uranium and other chemical weapons like white phosphorus, Iraqis will continue to suffer from birth defects and other related illnesses for generations.
How did we get there? War propaganda was essential in paving the way for the Iraq war. Americans are generally skeptical about launching new wars, so it takes a steady media bombardment about the alleged depravities of any targeted regime before public opinion begins to shift in favor of war.
Because the neocons who helped launch the war have never had to face the consequences of their actions, they continue to promote war with impunity. Just this past week, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) was pushing for a US attack on North Korea in which millions may be killed. He said this weekend, “All the damage that would come from a war would be worth it in terms of long-term stability and national security.” That’s just what they said before the US attacked Iraq, and how did that turn out? I find it disgusting that the media continues to give airtime almost exclusively to those who promote more US disasters like Iraq.
The Iraqi parliament did something extraordinary last week. A majority of elected Iraqi representatives voted to demand that their prime minister draw up a timetable for the withdrawal of US troops from the country. President Obama had withdrawn US troops from Iraq in 2011, after a status of forces agreement could not be reached with the Iraqi government, but he returned the US military to Iraq under the auspices of fighting ISIS.
We had no business going into Iraq in the first place and we have no business remaining in Iraq. Al-Qaeda and ISIS emerged in Iraq because our attack and occupation of the country 15 years ago created fertile fields for extremism. Nothing will be achieved if we remain. Let’s listen to the Iraqis and just come home!

Op-ed by Ron Paul / Republished with permission / RPI / Report a typo

Ploumen: Nederlandse betrokkenheid bij het maken van Syrisch gifgas is (gelukkig) niet na te gaan

De levering van belachelijk grote hoeveelheden glycol, onderdeel voor het maken van antivries en mosterdgas, door Nederland is weliswaar bewezen, ook dat dit jarenlang gebeurde en dat Nederland meermaals is gewaarschuwd, ook het departement van Buitenlandse Handel (al heette dat destijds anders, diverse bewindslieden zijn in de loop van de jaren gewaarschuwd, deze stof niet te exporteren naar Syrië), maar of deze stof verdwenen is in het gifgas, dat o.a pas werd gebruikt in Syrië, is niet meer aan te tonen, aldus PvdA nitwit Ploumen, die gezien de manier waar op ze dit stelt, behoorlijk opgelucht is. Voorts is de ambassade gesloten in Syrië en is de situatie daar gevaarlijk, dus onderzoeken kan nu niet*. Wat denk je zelf Ploumen, dergelijke grote hoeveelheden, hadden nooit geleverd mogen worden aan de dictatoriale staat Syrië, belachelijk!

Wat deze zaak eens te meer aantoont, is het gore handelen van Nederland met landen als Syrië of bijvoorbeeld de Golfstaten en Saoedi-Arabië. Je kan dit soort landen geen wapens, of onderdelen van wapens leveren en dan denken, dat je een schoon geweten en idem handen kan houden. Zie bijvoorbeeld ook de levering van grote hoeveelheden kunstmest, die in de 80er jaren, goedgekeurd door VVD hufter Bolkestein, vanuit Nederland aan het Irak van Saddam Hoessein werden geleverd. Ook hier ging het om een stof, die in dergelijke grote hoeveelheden werd geleverd, dat deze voor niets anders gebruikt kon worden, dan voor het maken van gifgas (de hoeveelheden kunstmest waren voldoende om een heel continent mee te bedekken!) en ook toen werd Nederland meermaals gewaarschuwd. Van Anraat zit daar voor in de cel, maar Bolkestein had minstens naast hem moeten zitten………

*Het moet toch mogelijk zijn, dat uit het materiaal dat de VN wapeninspecteurs meenamen uit Syrie, aan te tonen, dat het Nederlandse glycol onderdeel uitmaakt van dat gif (als er inderdaad gifgas is gebruikt).