Jeffrey Epstein (exploitant kindermisbruik netwerk) ‘overleden aan suïcide’

Gisteren maakten autoriteiten bekend dat Jeffrey Epstein zichzelf inderdaad heeft gesuïcideerd. (een te verwachten reactie)

Caitlin Johnstone stelt in een artikel met de kop ‘Jeffrey Epstein overlijdt aan ‘suïcide”, dat Epstein, de organisator en exploitant van een kindermisbruiknetwerk, werd gesuïcideerd….. Waarmee ze overigens ontkent dat eerdere beweringen over Epstein kloppen, beweringen waarin men stelt dat hij nooit de rechtbank mocht bereiken, eenvoudig daar er te veel hooggeplaatste en/of machtige figuren waren verbonden met dit misbruiknetwerk, figuren als Donald Trump en Bill Clinton……… Johnstone stelt dat deze zaak nooit de echt machtigen zou hebben getroffen, daar ‘het moeras het moeras beschermt…’

Voorts komt Johnstone terug op hardnekkige geruchten dat Epstein een band zou hebben met de moorddadige Israëlische geheime dienst Mossad….. Mossad zou gegevens hebben ontvangen van Epstein waarmee men politici zou kunnen chanteren die seksuele contacten hadden met kinderen…. Een verhaal dat zo maar zou kunnen kloppen, gezien de geschiedenis van deze geheime dienst, waarbij deze zaak nog maar klein grut is………
Epstein werd ‘gesuïcideerd’ terwijl hij onder intensief suïcide toezicht stond, een toezicht dat volgens Johnstone maar de vraag is, daar enkelen dat ontkennen……. Echter het zou zonder meer een schande zijn als dit niet het geval was, zeker na alle ophef op de eerste suïcide poging…… Ofwel wat mij betreft is het duidelijk dat Epstein werd vermoord, zelfs al zou hij de hand aan zichzelf hebben geslagen, immers suïcide zou na het eerdere incident onmogelijk moeten zijn geweest, een incident waarover de autoriteiten stelden dat Epstein een suïcide poging zou hebben begaan…… Ingewijden stellen daarover dat hij verwondingen had die hij onmogelijk bij zichzelf zou hebben kunnen aangebracht, kortom na dat ‘incident’ zou een ‘tweede suïcidepoging’ onmogelijk moeten zijn geweest…….

De consequentie van deze moord uh ‘suïcidepoging’ voor de gevangenis waar dit gebeurde: 3 schorsingen, tijdens het lopende onderzoek…… Gegarandeerd dat uit onderzoek zal blijken dat gevangenispersoneel niets te verwijten valt, of de zaak zou tot nog veel meer maatschappelijke ophef moeten leiden, in dat geval zouden de 3 personeelsleden (inclusief de directeur) wellicht op straat worden geschopt……….
Lees ook de eerdere berichten over deze zaak van mijn hand, de links daartoe vindt je onder het volgende artikel:

Jeffrey Epstein Dies Of “Suicide”

Disappointing everyone yet surprising no one, accused sex trafficker and alleged billionaire Jeffrey Epstein has “committed” “suicide”. Details are muddled and conflicting, with CNN reporting that Epstein “was taken from New York’s Metropolitan Correctional Center at 3:30 a.m. Saturday in cardiac arrest and died at an area hospital” and the New York Times reporting that “Mr. Epstein hung himself and his body was found this morning at roughly 7:30.”
Some reports claim that Epstein has been on suicide watch due to a prior alleged suicide attempt three weeks ago when he was found unconscious with bruising on his neck, others deny it. If he wasn’t it’s weird because he obviously should have been, and if he was it’s weird because it failed. Prisons vary greatly in how they implement suicide watch protocol, but at bare minimum it should mean that unsafe objects have been removed from the prisoner’s cell and monitoring has been greatly increased. Stockton University criminal justice professor Christine Tartaro told CNN in an interview on the subject in 2017 that on suicide watch “there should be constant, one-on-one eyes on (suicidal) inmates.”
How is Jeffery Epstein going to commit “suicide”?

Following Epstein’s arrest last month on federal sex trafficking charges, many people predicted that exactly this would happen, some half-jokingly and some not. This is because, as Whitney Webb of Mint Press News documented in a recent article titled “Mega Group, Maxwells and Mossad: The Spy Story at the Heart of the Jeffrey Epstein Scandal”, Epstein appears to have been involved in a complex Mossad-tied sexual blackmail operation and had close ties with many powerful people, including Donald Trump and the Clintons. The narrative that the Clintons have a penchant for “suiciding” their enemies was already a viral idea in right-wing conspiracy circles, and many of the early prognostications of Epstein’s fate came from that side of the political aisle.
But those voicing skepticism about Epstein’s death today come from all across the political spectrum, from left to right and from fringe to mainstream.
People close to Epstein fear he was murdered… as Epstein told authorities someone tried to kill him in a previous incident weeks earlier. He was described as being in good spirits in recent days,” claims The Washington Post‘s Carol Leonnig.
Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, various billionaire wall st. goons, hollywood elites and royal family creeps breathe a sigh of relief. He happens to have dirt on every powerful scumbag alive, how mighty convenient!” tweeted Secular Talk‘s Kyle Kulinski.
If Epstein’s death is still under investigation, and no one can explain yet how he killed himself, why is mainstream media reporting it definitively as a suicide? Even the FBI is calling it an ‘apparent suicide’,” tweeted journalist Max Blumenthal.
How was Epstein not on the most intensive suicide watch protocol available???” tweeted journalist Michael Tracey.
Scandalous. I supervised jail suicide investigations at DOJ. Experts will tell you that it’s essentially always true that jail inmate suicides are preventable, so when one happens it represents a majorfailure on the part of the jail,” tweeted human rights lawyer Sam Bagenstos.
Something about this whole situation stinks,” legal analyst Rikki Klieman told CBS today. “What you have is someone who attempted suicide and now is on a suicide watch, and in the midst of the suicide watch manages to commit suicide? There are gonna be heads that will roll from the Bureau of Prisons looking at the [Metropolitan Correctional Center], because this is the type of situation where you do not know if it’s a suicide or you do not know if it is something else.”
“A guy who had information that would have destroyed rich and powerful men’s lives ends up dead in his jail cell. How predictably…Russian”.
— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) August 10, 2019
Others, of course, have been bleating about Russia for no reason.
A guy who had information that would have destroyed rich and powerful men’s lives ends up dead in his jail cell. How predictably…Russian,” tweeted MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough to thousands of retweets and tens of thousands of likes.
This story is nuts. I personally am on record disagreeing with those on both sides of the aisle who’ve been claiming that the Epstein scandal was going to lead to mass arrests of extremely powerful people in Washington, because the swamp protects itself. We see that today clearer than ever. Whatever happened in that prison cell today, it made some nasty swamp monsters very happy.

Jeffrey Epstein’s suicide ends the criminal case against him because no one else was charged in the indictment,” tweeted former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti, adding, “Epstein’s death means that there won’t be a public trial or other proceedings that could reveal evidence of his wrongdoing. Evidence collected via grand jury subpoena won’t be released to the public.”

—————————————–

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 work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

=======================================
Zie ook:
Epstein vermoord volgens patholoog-anatoom

Jeffrey Epstein en Ghislaine Maxwell werkten mede voor de militaire geheime dienst van Israël

Kindermisbruikers beschermd door overheden

Donald Trump – Jeffey Epstein: you’ve got to grab them by the pussy

´Russiagate, ‘couppoging tegen Trump’ en kindermisbruik netwerk Epstein zijn gekoppeld´

Prince Andrew ontkent kennis kindermisbruiknetwerk Epstein, maar……..

Jeffrey Epstein waarschijnlijk op ‘loonlijst’ Mossad, de Israëlische geheime dienst

Jeffrey Epstein, beheerder van een kindermisbruiknetwerk ‘is gesuïcideerd’ ofwel vermoord

Jeffrey Epstein: seksueel wangedrag van welgestelden veelal onder de pet gehouden

Jeffrey Epsteins kleine zwarte pedo-boek met namen als Bill Clinton, David Koch, Courtney Love, prins Andrew en Tony Blair

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

NewsGuard is het nieuwste wapen waarmee de VS overheid, haar geheime diensten, het militair-industrieel complex, oligarchen, de grote (corrupte) bedrijven, de financiële sector en dan m.n. de banken, de farmaceutische maffia en uiteraard de reguliere massamedia de bevolking verder willen manipuleren en waarmee de alternatieve media de oorlog wordt verklaard….. Sterker nog: vertegenwoordigers van deze organisaties/bedrijven zijn verbonden aan NewsGuard…..
NewsGuard wordt als het straks tegenzit standaard als app ingebouwd in alle computers en smartphones die in de VS of door VS bedrijven worden geproduceerd….. Sterker nog Microsoft gebruikt deze app al….
Met platforms als Facebook en Twitter, die nu al op grote schaal accounts verwijderen, is de toekomst klaar voor grootschalige geschiedvervalsing en het brengen van propaganda op een schaal waar zelfs Goebbels niet van durfde dromen….. Nu al wordt SafeGuard gebruikt door openbare bibliotheken, scholen en universiteiten in de VS……
Het zal je niet verbazen dat NewsGuard uiteraard geen moeite heeft met fake news (nepnieuws) en desinformatie in de reguliere massamedia, zoals die op CNN en de Washington Post (WaPo), waar aantoonbaar een groot aantal kul verhalen werden gebracht, waarvoor deze ‘fake news’ organen nooit een rectificatie plaatsten, alles zonder daar ook maar enige kritiek voor te hebben gekregen van NewsGuard…… Waar collega ‘s van deze VS nieuwsmedia met grote graagte de leugens van deze twee hebben geholpen door verdere verspreiding van die leugens…… (zoals je begrijpt geldt dit ook voor de rest van de westerse massamedia)

Het voorgaande is niet zo vreemd als je ziet dat de reguliere massamedia in handen zijn van oligarchen en grote investeringsgroepen, groepen die het grootste belang hebben bij het bewaren van de huidige status quo en het opjagen van winsten met propaganda, zoals die voor de wapenfabrikanten, waaronder ik ook de fabrikanten reken die rollend, varend en vliegens oorlogstuig produceren…..

Overigens zijn ook publieke zendgemachtigden al lang niet meer onafhankelijk, ze worden grotendeels door de staat betaald en je weet het: wiens brood men eet diens woord men spreekt!! (klik voor de gein op het label NOS, direct onder dit bericht)

Schokkend te lezen dat het American Enterprise Institute (AEI) al 4 jaar voor 911 pleitte voor een nieuws Pearl Harbour, om meer steun te verkrijgen voor het militaire apparaat en de terreur die het in het buitenland uitoefent (alleen deze eeuw al meer dan 2,5 moorden….)…..
Lees het uitstekende relaas van Whitney Webb over griezelorganisatie NewsGuard, die gegarandeerd ook in de rest van het westen zal worden geïntroduceerd, althans als dat nog nodig is, nadat bedrijven als Microsoft de NewsGuard app al hebben overgenomen……. (let op: als je gisteren mijn bericht met de volgende titel hebt gelezen: ‘Britse militaire geheime dienst bedient zich van moddergooien en andere manipulaties om Europese en VS politiek te manipuleren, zo blijkt uit gelekte documenten, op basis van een artikel van William Blumenthal en Mark Ames, zal het je opvallen dat een paar afbeeldingen gebruikt door Webb, een dag eerder door Blumenthal en Ames in hun artikel werden gebruikt, zoals Webb ook een paar kleine delen overnam van de tekst daarbij)

NewsGuard Launches War on Alternative Media

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor NewsGuard Launches War on Alternative Media

January 9, 2019 at 10:39 pm
Written by Whitney Webb
(MPN) — Soon after the social media “purge” of independent media sites and pages this past October, a top neoconservative insider — Jamie Fly — was caught stating that the mass deletion of anti-establishment and anti-war pages on Facebook and Twitter was “just the beginning” of a concerted effort by the U.S. government and powerful corporations to silence online dissent within the United States and beyond.
While a few, relatively uneventful months in the online news sphere have come and gone since Fly made this ominous warning, it appears that the neoconservatives and other standard bearers of the military-industrial complex and the U.S. oligarchy are now poised to let loose their latest digital offensive against independent media outlets that seek to expose wrongdoing in both the private and public sectors.
As MintPress News Editor-in-Chief Mnar Muhawesh recently wrote, MintPress was informed that it was under review by an organization called Newsguard Technologies, which described itself to MintPress as simply a “news rating agency” and asked Muhawesh to comment on a series of allegations, several of which were blatantly untrue. However, further examination of this organization reveals that it is funded by and deeply connected to the U.S. government, neo-conservatives, and powerful monied interests, all of whom have been working overtime since the 2016 election to silence dissent to American forever-wars and corporate-led oligarchy.
More troubling still, Newsguard — by virtue of its deep connections to government and Silicon Valley — is lobbying to have its rankings of news sites installed by default on computers in U.S. public libraries, schools, and universities as well as on all smartphones and computers sold in the United States.
In other words, as Newsguard’s project advances, it will soon become almost impossible to avoid this neocon-approved news site’s ranking systems on any technological device sold in the United States. Worse still, if its efforts to quash dissenting voices in the U.S. are successful, Newsguard promises that its next move will be to take its system global.
Red light, green light . . .
Newsguard has received considerable attention in the mainstream media of late, having been the subject of a slew of articles in the Washington Post, the Hill, the Boston Globe, Politico, Bloomberg, Wired, and many others just over the past few months. Those articles portray Newsguard as using “old-school journalism” to fight “fake news” through its reliance on nine criteria allegedly intended to separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to online news.
Newsguard separates sites it deems worthy and sites it considers unreliable by using a color-coded rating — green, yellow, or red — and more detailed “nutrition labels” regarding a site’s credibility or lack thereof. Rankings are created by Newsguard’s team of “trained analysts.” The color-coding system may remind some readers of the color-coded terror threat-level warning system that was created after 9/11, making it worth noting that Tom Ridge, the former secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) who oversaw the implementation of that system under George W. Bush, is on Newsguard’s advisory board.
As Newsguard releases a new rating of a site, that rating automatically spreads to all computers that have installed its news ranking browser plug-in. That plug-in is currently available for free for the most commonly used internet browsers. NewsGuard directly markets the browser plug-in to libraries, schools and internet users in general.
According to its website, Newsguard has rated more than 2,000 news and information sites. However, it plans to take its ranking efforts much farther by eventually reviewing “the 7,500 most-read news and information websites in the U.S.—about 98 percent of news and information people read and share online” in the United States in English.
A recent Gallup study, which was supported and funded by Newsguard as well as the Knight Foundation (itself a major investor in Newsguard), stated that a green rating increased users likelihood to share and read content while a red rating decreased that likelihood. Specifically, it found 63 percent would be less likely to share news stories from red-rated websites, and 56 percent would be more likely to share news from green-rated websites, though the fact that Newsguard and one of its top investors funded the poll makes it necessary to take these findings with a grain of salt.
However, some of the rankings Newsguard itself has publicized show that it is manifestly uninterested in fighting “misinformation.” How else to explain the fact that the Washington Post and CNN both received high scores even though both have written stories or made statements that later proved to be entirely false? For example, CNN falsely claimed in 2016 that it was illegal for Americans to read WikiLeaks releases and illegally colluded with the DNC to craft presidential debate questions.
In addition, in 2017, CNN published a fake story that a Russian bank linked to a close ally of President Donald Trump was under Senate investigation. That same year, CNN was forced to retract a report that the Trump campaign had been tipped off early about WikiLeaks documents damaging to Hillary Clinton when it later learned the alert was about material already publicly available.
The Washington Post, whose $600 million conflict of interest with the CIA goes unnoted by Newsguard, has also published false stories since the 2016 election, including one article that falsely claimed that “Russian hackers” had tapped into Vermont’s electrical grid. It was later found that the grid itself was never breached and the “hack” was only an isolated laptop with a minor malware problem. Yet, such acts of journalistic malpractice are apparently of little concern to Newsguard when those committing such acts are big-name corporate media outlets.
Can you distinguish between propaganda and a free press? NewsGuard can help.

See NewsGuard’s other Tweets
Furthermore, Newsguard gives a high rating to Voice of America, the U.S. state-funded media outlet, even though its former acting associate director said that the outlet produces “fluff journalism” and despite the fact that it was recently reformed to “provide news that supports our [U.S.] national security objectives.” However, RT receives a low “red” rating for being funded by the Russian government and for “raising doubts about other countries and their institutions” (i.e., including reporting critical of the institutions and governments of the U.S. and its allies).
Keeping the conversation safe for the corporatocracy
Newsguard describes itself as an organization dedicated to “restoring trust and accountability” and using “journalism to fight false news, misinformation and disinformation.” While it repeatedly claims on its website that its employees “have no political axes to grind” and “care deeply about reliable journalism’s pivotal role in democracy,” a quick look at its co-founders, top funders and advisory board make it clear that Newsguard is aimed at curbing voices that hold the powerful — in both government and the private sector — to account.
Newsguard is the latest venture to result from the partnership between Steven Brill and Louis Gordon Crovitz, who currently serve as co-CEOs of the group. Brill is a long-time journalist — published in TIME and The New Yorker, among others — who most recently founded the Yale Journalism Initiative, which aims to encourage Yale students who “aspire to contribute to democracy in the United States and around the world” to become journalists at top U.S. and international media organizations. He first teamed up with Crovitz in 2009 to create Journalism Online, which sought to make the online presence of top American newspapers and other publishers profitable, and was also the CEO of the company that partnered up with the TSA to offer “registered” travelers the ability to move more quickly through airport security — for a price, of course.
While Brill’s past does not in itself raise red flags, Crovitz — his partner in founding Journalism Online, then Press+, and now Newsguard — is the last person one would expect to find promoting any legitimate effort to “restore trust and accountability” in journalism. In the early 1980s. Crovitz held a number of positions at Dow Jones and at the Wall Street Journal, eventually becoming executive vice president of the former and the publisher of the latter before both were sold to Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp in 2007. He is also a board member of Business Insider, which has received over $30 million from Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos in recent years.
In addition to being a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Crovitz proudly notes in his bio, available on Newsguard’s website, that he has been an “editor or contributor to books published by the American Enterprise Institute and Heritage Foundation.” Though many MintPress readers are likely familiar with these two institutions, for those who are not, it is worth pointing out that the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) is one of the most influential neoconservative think tanks in the country and its “scholars,” directors and fellows have included neoconservative figures like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, John Bolton and Frederick Kagan.
During the George W. Bush administration, AEI was instrumental in promoting the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq and has since advocated for militaristic solutions to U.S. foreign policy objectives and the expansion of the U.S.’ military empire as well as the “War on Terror.”
During the Bush years, AEI was also closely associated with the now defunct and controversial neoconservative organization known as the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), which presciently called, four years before 9/11, for a “new Pearl Harbor” as needed to rally support behind American military adventurism.
The Heritage Foundation, like AEI, was also supportive of the war in Iraq and has pushed for the expansion of the War on Terror and U.S. missile defense and military empire. Its corporate donors over the years have included Procter & Gamble, Chase Manhattan Bank, Dow Chemical, and Exxon Mobil, among others.
Crovitz’s associations with AEI and the Heritage Foundation, as well as his ties to Wall Street and the upper echelons of corporate media, are enough to make any thinking person question his commitment to being a fair watchdog of “legitimate journalism.” Yet, beyond his innumerable connections to neoconservatives and powerful monied interest, Crovitz has repeatedly been accused of inserting misinformation into his Wall Street Journal columns, with groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation accusing him of “repeatedly getting his facts wrong” on NSA surveillance and other issues. Some of the blatant falsehoods that have appeared in Crovitz’s work have never been corrected, even when his own sources called him out for misinformation.
For example, in a WSJ opinion piece that was written by Crovitz in 2012, Crovitz was accused of making “fantastically false claims” about the history of the internet by the very people he had cited to support those claims.
As TechDirt wrote at the time:

Almost everyone he [Crovitz] sourced or credited to support his argument that the internet was invented entirely privately at Xerox PARC and when Vint Cerf helped create TCP/IP, has spoken out to say he’s wrong. And that list includes both Vint Cerf, himself, and Xerox. Other sources, including Robert Taylor (who was there when the internet was invented) and Michael Hiltzik, have rejected Crovitz’s spinning of their own stories.”

The oligarch team’s deep bench
While Brill and Crovitz’s connections alone should be enough cause for alarm, a cursory examination of Newsguard’s advisory board makes it clear that Newsguard was created to serve the interests of American oligarchy. Chief among Newsguard’s advisors are Tom Ridge, the first Secretary of Homeland Security under George W. Bush and Ret. General Michael Hayden, a former CIA director, a former NSA director and principal at the Chertoff Group, a security consultancy seeking to “advise corporate clients and governments, including foreign governments” on security matters that was co-founded by former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who also currently serves as the board chairman of major weapons manufacturer BAE systems.


Another Newsguard advisor of note is Richard Stengel, former editor of Time magazine, a “distinguished fellow” at the Atlantic Council and Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy under President Barack Obama. At a panel discussion hosted last May by the Council on Foreign Relations, Stengel described his past position at the State Department as “chief propagandist” and also stated that he is “not against propaganda. Every country does it and they have to do it to their own population and I don’t necessarily think it’s that awful.”
(de video, waarvan de still in het hieronder weergegeven artikel kan ik niet overnemen, zie daarvoor het origineel)
Embedded video
At a Council on Foreign Relations forum about “fake news,” former Editor at Time Magazine Richard Stengel directly states that he supports the use of propaganda on American citizens – then shuts the session down when challenged about how propaganda is used against the third world

Other Newsguard advisors include Don Baer, former White House communications director and advisor to Bill Clinton and current chairman of both PBS and the influential PR firm Burson Cohn & Wolfe as well as Elise Jordan, former communications director for the National Security Council and former speech-writer for Condoleezza Rice, as well as the widow of slain journalist Michael Hastings — who was writing an exposé on former CIA director John Brennan at the time of his suspicious death.
A look at Newguard’s investors further illustrates the multifarious connections between this organization and the American political and corporate elite. While Brill and Crovitz themselves are the company’s top investors, one of Newsguard’s most important investors is the Publicis Groupe. Publicis is the third largest global communications company in the world, with more than 80,000 employees in over 100 countries and an annual revenue of over €9.6 billion ($10.98 billion) in 2017. It is no stranger to controversy, as one of its subsidiaries, Qorvis, recently came under fire for exploiting U.S. veterans at the behest of the Saudi government and also helped the Saudi government to “whitewash” its human rights record and its genocidal war in Yemen after receiving $6 million from the Gulf Kingdom in 2017.
Furthermore, given its size and influence, it is unsurprising that the Publicis Groupe counts many powerful corporations and governments among its clientele. Some of its top clients in 2018 included pharmaceutical giants Eli Lilly, Merck, Pfizer and Bayer/Monsanto as well as Starbucks, Procter & Gamble, McDonalds, Kraft Heinz, Burger King, and the governments of Australia and Saudi Arabia. Given its influential role in funding Newsguard, it is reasonable to point out the potential conflict of interest posed by the fact that sites that accurately report on Publicis’ powerful clients — but generate bad publicity — could be targeted for such reports in Newsguard’s ranking.
In addition to the Publicis Groupe, another major investor in Newsguard is the Blue Haven Initiative, which is the venture capital “impact investment” fund of the wealthy Pritzker family — one of the top 10 wealthiest families in the U.S., best known as the owners of the Hyatt Hotel chain and for being the second largest financial contributors to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Other top investors include John McCarter, a long-time executive at U.S. government contractor Booz Allen Hamilton, as well as Thomas Glocer, former CEO of Reuters and a member of the boards of pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co., financial behemoth Morgan Stanley, and the Council on Foreign Relations, as well as a member of the Atlantic Council’s International Advisory Board.
Through these investors, Newsguard managed to raise $6 million to begin its ranking efforts in March of 2018. Newsguard’s actual revenues and financing, however, have not been disclosed despite the fact that it requires the sites it ranks to disclose their funding. In a display of pure hypocrisy, Newsguard’s United States Securities and Exchange Commission Form D — which was filed March 5, 2018 — states that the company “declined to disclose” the size of its total revenue.
Why give folks a choice?
While even a quick glance at its advisory board alone would be enough for many Americans to decline to install Newsguard’s browser extension on their devices, the danger of Newsguard is the fact that it is diligently working to make the adoption of its app involuntary. Indeed, if voluntary adoption of Newsguard’s app were the case, there would likely be little cause for concern, given that its website attracts barely more than 300 visits per month and its social-media following is relatively small, with just over 2,000 Twitter followers and barely 500 Facebook likes at the time of this article’s publication.
To illustrate its slip-it-under-the-radar strategy, Newsguard has gone directly to state governments to push its browser extension onto entire state public library systems, even though its website suggests that individual public libraries are welcome to install the extension if they so choose. The first state to install Newsguard on all of its public library computers across its 51 branches was the state of Hawaii — which was the first to partner with Newsguard’s “news literacy initiative,” just last month.
Aloha, Hawaiian libraries! The state has added the NewsGuard extension to the computers patrons use in all its public libraries. Thanks to for sponsoring news literacy. http://bigislandnow.com/2018/12/17/libraries-join-newsguard-in-news-literacy-partnership/

According to local media, Newsguard “now works with library systems representing public libraries across the country, and is also partnering with middle schools, high schools, universities, and educational organizations to support their news literacy efforts,” suggesting that these Newsguard services targeting libraries and schools are soon to become a compulsory component of the American library and education system, despite Newsguard’s glaring conflicts of interest with massive multinational corporations and powerful government power-brokers.
Notably, Newsguard has a powerful partner that has allowed it to start finding its way into public library and school computers throughout the country. As part of its new “Defending Democracy” initiative, Microsoft announced last August that it would be partnering with Newsguard to actively market the company’s ranking app and other services to libraries and schools throughout the country. Microsoft’s press release regarding the partnership states that Newsguard “will empower voters by providing them with high-quality information about the integrity and transparency of online news sites.”
Since then, Microsoft has now added the Newsguard app as a built-in feature of Microsoft Edge, its browser for iOS and Android mobile devices, and is unlikely to stop there. Indeed, as a recent report in favor of Microsoft’s partnership with Newsguard noted, “we could hope that this new partnership will allow Microsoft to add NewsGuard to Edge on Windows 10 [operating system for computers] as well.”
Newsguard, for its part, seems confident that its app will soon be added by default to all mobile devices. On its website, the organization notes that “NewsGuard will be available on mobile devices when the digital platforms such as social media sites and search engines or mobile operating systems add our ratings and Nutrition Labels directly.” This shows that Newsguard isn’t expecting its rating systems to be offered as a downloadable application for mobile devices but something that social media sites like Facebook, search engines like Google, and mobile device operating systems that are dominated by Apple and Google will “directly” integrate into nearly every smartphone and tablet sold in the United States.
A Boston Globe article on Newsguard from this past October makes this plan even more clear. The Globe wrote at the time:

Microsoft has already agreed to make NewsGuard a built-in feature in future products, and [Newsguard co-CEO] Brill said he’s in talks with other online titans. The goal is to have NewsGuard running by default on our computers and phones whenever we scan the Web for news.”

This eventuality is made all the more likely given the fact that, in addition to Microsoft, Newsguard is also closely connected to Google, as Google has been a partner of the Publicis Groupe since 2014, when the two massive companies joined Condé Nast to create a new marketing service called La Maison that is “focused on producing engaging content for marketers in the luxury space.” Given Google’s power in the digital sphere as the dominant search engine, the creator of the Android mobile operating system, and the owner of YouTube, its partnership with Publicis means that Newsguard’s rating system will soon see itself being promoted by yet another of Silicon Valley’s most powerful companies.
Furthermore, there is an effort underway to integrate Newsguard into social media sites like Facebook and Twitter. Indeed, as Newsguard was launched, co-CEO Brill stated that he planned to sell the company’s ratings of news sites to Facebook and Twitter. Last March, Brill told CNN that “We’re asking them [Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft and Google] to pay a fraction of what they pay their P.R. people and their lobbyists to talk about the problem.”
On Wednesday, Gallup released a poll that will likely be used as a major selling point to social media giants. The poll — funded by Newsguard and the Knight Foundation, which is a top investor in Newsguard and has recently funded a series of Gallup polls relating to online news — seems to have been created with the intention of manufacturing consent for the integration of Newsguard with top social media sites.
This is because the promoted findings from the study are as follows:“89% of users of social media sites and 83% overall want social media sites and search engines to integrate NewsGuard ratings and reviews into their news feeds and search results” and “69% would trust social media and search companies more if they took the simple step of including NewsGuard in their products.” However, a disclaimer at the end of the poll states that the results, which were based on the responses of 706 people each of whom received $2 to participate, “may not be reflective of attitudes of the broader U.S adult population.”
With trust at Facebook nose-diving and Facebook’s censorship of independent media already well underway, the findings of this poll could well be used to justify its integration into Facebook’s platform. The connections of both Newsguard and Facebook to the Atlantic Council make this seem a given.
Financial censorship
Another Newsguard service shows that this organization is also seeking to harm independent media financially by targeting online revenue. Through a service called “Brandguard,” which it describes as a “brand safety tool aimed at helping advertisers keep their brands off of unreliable news and information sites while giving them the assurance they need to support thousands of Green-rated [i.e., Newsguard-approved] news and information sites, big and small.”
At the time the service was announced last November, Newsguard co-CEO Brill stated that the company was “in discussions with the ad tech firms, leading agencies, and major advertisers” eager to adopt a blacklist of news sites deemed “unreliable” by Newsguard. This is unsurprising given the leading role of the Publicis Groupe, one of the world’s largest advertising and PR firms, has in funding Newsguard. As a consequence, it seems likely that many, if not all, of Publicis’ client companies will choose to adopt this blacklist to help crush many of the news sites that are unafraid to hold them accountable.
It is also important to note here that Google’s connection to Publicis and thus Newsguard could spell trouble for independent news pages that rely on Google Adsense for some or all of their ad-based revenue. Google Adsense has long been targeting sites like MintPress by demonetizing articles for information or photographs it deemed controversial, including demonetizing one article for including a photo showing U.S. soldiers involved in torturing Iraqi detainees at the infamous Abu Ghraib prison.
Since then, Google — a U.S. military contractor — has repeatedly tried to shutter ad access to MintPress articles that involve reporting that is critical of U.S. empire and military expansion. One article that has been repeatedly flagged by Google details how many African-Americans have questioned whether the Women’s March has aided or harmed the advancement of African-Americans in the United States. Google has repeatedly claimed that the article, which was written by African-American author and former Washington Post bureau chief Jon Jeter, contains “dangerous content.”
Given Google’s already established practice of targeting factual reporting it deemed controversial through Adsense, Brandguard will likely offer the tech giant just the excuse it needs to cut off sites like MintPress, and other pages equally critical of empire, altogether.
An action plan for the genuine protection of journalism
Though it is just getting started, Newsguard’s plan to insert its app into every device and major social-media network is a threat to any news site that regularly publishes information that rubs any of Newsguard’s investors, partners or advisors the wrong way. Given its plan to rank the English-language U.S. news sites that account for 98 percent of U.S. digital news consumption, Newsguard’s agenda is of the utmost concern to every independent media page active in the United States and beyond — given Newsguard’s promise to take its project global.
By linking up with former CIA and NSA directors, Silicon Valley Giants, and massive PR firms working for some of the most controversial governments and corporations in the world, Newsguard has betrayed the fact that it is not actually seeking to “restore trust and accountability” in journalism, but to “restore trust and accountability” in news outlets that protect the existing power structure and help shield the corporate-led oligarchy and military-industrial complex from criticism.
Not only is it trying to tank the reputations of independent media through its biased ranking system, Newsguard is also seeking to attack these alternative voices financially and by slipping its ranking system by default onto all computers and phones sold in the U.S.
However, Newsguard and it agenda of guarding the establishment from criticism can be stopped. By supporting independent media and unplugging from social media sites committed to censorship, like Facebook and Twitter, we can strengthen the independent media community and keep it afloat despite the unprecedented nature of these attacks on free speech and watchdog journalism.
Beyond that, a key way to keep Newsguard and those behind it on their toes is to hold them to
account by pointing out their clear conflicts of interest and hypocrisy and by derailing the narrative they are carefully crafting that Newsguard is “non-partisan,” “trustworthy,” and true guardians against the scourge of “fake news.”
While this report has sought to be a starting point for such work, anyone concerned about Newsguard and its connections to the war machine and corrupt corporations should feel encouraged to point out the organization’s own conflicts of interests and shady connections via its Twitter and Facebook pages and the feedback section on Newsguard’s website. The best way to defeat this new tool of the neocons is to put them on notice and to continue to expose Newsguard as a guardian of empire, not a guardian of journalism.

======================================
Zie ook:
Russiagate geslaagd: geen impeachment van Trump, waar Clinton en haar team na bewezen misdaden vrijuit gaan…..

Warren (democratisch presidentskandidaat) toont met hulp van Facebook aan dat dit bedrijf niet hoort te gaan over wat wel en niet is toegestaan

WhatsApp beperking in strijd tegen fake news

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

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

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

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!

Voor nog meer berichten over Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft en censuur, klik op het betreffende label direct onder dit bericht.

VN rapport: de VS geeft ISIS de ruimte in door VS illegaal bezet gebied in Syrië…..

Door te zorgen dat IS zich nog in een paar kleine stukken van Syrië kan handhaven, denkt de VS zich een legitimatie te kunnen verschaffen voor haar illegale aanwezigheid in Syrië……

De VS bombardeert IS zogenaamd, maar geeft al een paar dagen van te voren aan waar het gaat bombarderen, zodat IS geen verliezen lijdt……. Dezelfde tactiek gebruikte de VS voor het
voet aan de grond zetten in Syrië en voordat de Russen de democratisch gekozen regering van Syrië te hulp schoot tegen de smerige en barbaarse terreur die IS en andere, door westerse media en politici ‘gematigde rebellen’ genoemde, terreurgroepen uitoefenden op haar bevolking…….
Ook in Irak heeft de VS meermaals gebieden gebombardeerd waar letterlijk geen hond aanwezig was (woestijngebied)……. Er zijn zelfs een flink aantal getuigen die hebben gezien dat de VS terreurgroep IS bevoorraadde in Irak…. Voorts heeft de VS meerdere keren IS troepen een vrijgeleide gegeven vanuit Irak en hen begeleid naar Syrisch grondgebied, zodat ze daar het zo door de VS gehate Syrische bewind* konden bestrijden (en ach de mensen die door IS werden gemarteld, verkracht en vermoord, niets meer of minder dan bijkomende schade ‘voor het goede doel, moet je maar denken….’)….

A U.S.-backed anti-government fighter mans a heavy automatic machine gun, left, next to an American soldier as they take their positions at Tanf, a border crossing between Syria and Iraq (Hammurabi’s Justice News/AP)
Toen Rusland begin oktober 2015 Syrië te hulp schoot, werden IS en andere terreurgroepen als Al Qaida Syrië (o.a. al-Nusra), naast de succesvolle strijd tegen deze groepen door de Koerden in Syrië, voor het eerst goed bestreden en bereikten de Russen in een paar maanden tijd meer dan de VS in meer dan een jaar tijd had ‘gepresteerd….’**
Het is meer dan duidelijk dat de VS troepen wil behouden in Syrië, niet alleen om Syrië op te kunnen delen en zo de macht van het wettige Syrische bewind te breken, maar ook voor een eventuele aanval op Iran……… (Syrië grenst ook aan Iran)
De plekken waar IS zich nog ophoudt liggen in door de VS beheerst gebied en niet zelden grijpt de VS in als het reguliere Syrische leger IS aanvalt…… De VS heeft zelfs dorpen gebombardeerd die trouw waren aan de door hen gekozen Syrische regering en weigerden doorgang te verlenen aan de door de VS gesteunde terroristen (‘rebellen’) groepen van o.a. de Qasad militie, bestaande uit strijders die voorheen voor IS terreur uitoefenden op de Syrische bevolking……..
Lees het volgende artikel van Whitney Webb over de VN rapportage, eerder geplaatst op MintPress News en ga eens na hoe vaak je de laatste jaren werd belazerd door de reguliere media….. Zie ook de link onder dat artikel naar een keihard gelogen stuk van Remco Anderson in de Volkskrant uit oktober 2015……..

ISIS Given ‘Breathing Space’ in US-Occupied Areas of Syria: UN Report

August 15, 2018 at 9:57 pm
Written by Whitney Webb
By maintaining an ISIS pocket in the territory it occupies, the U.S. can continue to justify its illegal presence in the country for the long-term, ultimately substituting Iran for ISIS as its new regional boogeyman.
(MPN Op-ed) — A recent report from the UN Security Council’s Sanctions Monitoring Team has found that many of the places in Syria where the terror group Daesh (ISIS) continues to operate, recuperate and extract oil for profit are in areas of the country occupied by the United States.
According to the report’s executive summary:

Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), having been defeated militarily in Iraq and most of the Syrian Arab Republic during 2017, rallied in early 2018 [owing to] a loss of momentum by forces fighting it in the east of the Syrian Arab Republic, which prolonged access by ISIL to resources and gave it breathing space to prepare for the next phase of its evolution into a global covert network.”

While the text itself doesn’t explicitly state who controls these areas of Syrian territory, maps of eastern Syria make it clear that the pockets of Daesh within U.S.-controlled territory have remained unchanged in size since November 2017 while the Daesh pockets in the Syrian government-controlled portion of eastern Syria have shrunk considerably since last November.

A map of the territory held by ISIS (grey) at the Syrian-Iraqi border in the U.S. controlled zone north of the Euphrates (yellow). April 24, 2018. Source | Syria Live Map
Furthermore, the UN report states that the areas where Daesh has rallied since the year began are located in “pockets of territory in the Syrian Arab Republic on the Iraqi border” where the group has mounted “attacks, including across the border into Iraq.” Again, area maps clearly show that the Daesh-controlled areas in only the U.S.-occupied portion of eastern Syria are along the Syria-Iraq border.
Notably, in the sliver of Daesh-controlled land between U.S. and Syrian government-controlled areas in the border city of Abu Kamal, when the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) has tried to attack Daesh positions in the area this year, they have been targeted by U.S. coalition airstrikes. U.S. coalition airstrikes have also attacked Syrian civilian villages in the government-controlled portion of Abu Kamal. Survivors of that attack claimed that their villages had been targeted for refusing the entry of the U.S.-backed opposition militias — such as the Qasad militia, which is largely composed of former Daesh fighters.
U.S. coalition airstrikes targeting the SAA in Abu Kamal and elsewhere in eastern Syria have also been the key cause of the “loss of momentum” of forces fighting Daesh that was cited in the UN report, as Syrian forces have declined to advance deep into U.S.-held territory in order to pursue Daesh after being bombed numerous times. In addition, the U.S.’ own bombing campaign against Daesh can hardly be called effective given that the U.S., along with their military proxy the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), frequently announce on social media when and where they will be bombing Daesh in eastern Syria days in advance.

View image on TwitterView image on Twitter

– After a short surveillance tour by Gen. Funk, Gen. Jarrard and commander in Middle Euphrates River Valley heval Çiya yesterday, operation to liberate to start today in the evening.

Beyond eastern Syria, the report also notes that another Daesh-infested area of concern is also located farther south in the area around the al-Tanf military base, which has been occupied by the United States since 2016. The UN report raises concerns about the Rukban refugee camp, which lies within the so-called “deconfliction” zone that the U.S. has imposed on a 55-kilometer radius around al-Tanf.

The report states:

The densely populated Rukban camp in southern Syrian Arab Republic contains some 80,000 internally displaced persons, including families of ISIL fighters, a situation which Member States fear might generate new ISIL cells.”

As with other Daesh-held areas under U.S. “protection,” the U.S. has attacked the SAA for attempting to enter the U.S.’ unilaterally-imposed “deconfliction” zone in an effort to attack Daesh militants.
Washington’s Daesh-Dependent Long-Game
The evidence that the U.S. presence in Syria is actually helping to strengthen Daesh flies in the face of the Pentagon’s justification for the U.S.’ occupation of northeastern Syria as being necessary because the Syrian government is not strong enough to defeat Daesh on its own.
However, as the recent UN report reveals, the Pentagon’s portrayal does not appear to be the reality of the situation.
As MintPress has noted in the past, this finding is hardly surprising given that the Defense Intelligence Agency report from 2012 revealed that the U.S. willingly allowed Daesh to be formed in order to destabilize the Syrian government and partition Syria through foreign military intervention. Since then, the U.S. has adapted its justifications for its presence in Syria, particularly after the failure of Daesh and foreign-funded opposition groups to depose the current government of Syria.
By maintaining a Daesh pocket in the territory it occupies, the U.S. can continue to justify its illegal presence in the country for the long-term. Indeed, just last month, the Trump administration made it clear that the U.S. military plans to stay in Syria for the long haul, substituting Iran for Daesh as its new regional boogeyman.
==================================

* De VS is o.a. pissig over de weigering van Syrië om gas- en oliepijpleidingen op haar grondgebied toe te staan, pijpleidingen o.a. vanuit de Verenigde Arabische Emiraten (VAE) richting Turkije en EU.

** Zie: ‘Russische en Iraanse hulp voor regime drijft rebellen Syrië in het nauw‘, een Volkskrant artikel uit 2015 waarin ‘journalist’ Remco Anderson keihard liegt dat Rusland vanaf het begin alleen de zogenaamde gematigde oppositie bestreed en IS met rust liet…….. Terwijl de Volkskrant niet één keer commentaar had op de wel heel ‘vreemde tactiek van de VS’, zoals die bijvoorbeeld te zien was voor de periode dat Rusland het Syrische volk te hulp schoot…….

Zie ook:
‘De jacht op het kwade’, hersenspoeling over de oorlog in Syrië op Canvas

Groot-Brittannië stopt steun aan ‘gematigde rebellen’ en zelfs media spreken van terroristen i.p.v. ‘rebellen

VS blijft burgerslachtoffers maken in zucht naar een machtspositie in Syrië…

Bij een luchtaanval van de VS in Syrië zijn naar schatting rond de 30 burgers vermoord…… De aanval was gericht op 2 steden in de buurt van Abu Kamal ten oosten van de Eufraat (rivier), in het grensgebied van Syrië en Irak.

In mei kondigde de VS nog aan de aanvallen op IS groepen te verhogen, echter wat het VS commando onder IS verstaat zijn allesbehalve IS terroristen, maar Syrische burgers in voor de VS strategische gebieden….. Gebieden die ofwel in handen zijn van het reguliere Syrische leger, dan wel gebieden die in handen van dit leger dreigen te vallen en waar de VS volkomen lak heeft aan burgerslachtoffers…… De VS erkent nog ontkent verantwoordelijk te zijn voor de luchtaanvallen, maar stelt dat het mogelijk zou kunnen zijn (….)* Wat betreft de slachtoffers: hetzelfde geldt voor de slachtoffers, die zijn vermoord tijdens de aanvallen van de VS tegen het reguliere Syrische leger en/of aan haar gelieerde groepen……..

De VS kon e.e.a. niet duidelijker maken dan door de steden Al-Souseh en AL-Baghouz Fowqani aan te vallen, daar deze steden weigerden doorgang te verlenen aan door de VS gesteunde terreurgroepen…. Volgens de media waren er onder de slachtoffers IS strijders, echter dat ontkennen de bewoners van die steden in alle toonaarden……. Voorts bevatten de aan de VS gelieerde terreurgroepen steeds vaker oud-IS strijders……..

Tja, Syrië is nog altijd een soevereine staat met een democratisch gekozen president, ofwel Syrië heeft alle recht om haar, door illegale groepen en landen (zoals de VS) ingenomen gebieden te bevrijden. Waar de zogenaamde gematigde rebellen, moordenaars, verkrachters en martelbeulen, die worden gesteund door het westen, hun vreselijke terreur uitoefenen op de Syrische bevolking en daarbij zelfs de sharia wetgeving gebruiken (of moet je spreken over misbruiken??)
Het is intussen wel duidelijk dat de VS zich niet zal terugtrekken uit Syrië en dat de wil van deze grootste terreurentiteit op aarde de daar strategische posities te behouden, tot nog veel meer bloedvergieten zal leiden….. Dit door de VS dat één op één verantwoordelijk is voor de opstand die tot het vele bloedvergieten en de oorlog in Syrië hebben geleid….. (de eerste aanzetten van de VS tot het omverwerpen van het Assad bewind middels een opstand die tot een coup moesten leiden, dateren al van 2006…)
Tijd dat het lamme orgaan, aangeduid met de naam Internationaal Strafhof (ICC) eindelijk eens actie onderneemt tegen de grootste terreurentiteit op aarde, de VS. Deze vereniging van terreurstaten is vanaf 1945 tot nu verantwoordelijk voor meer dan 22 miljoen moorden….**
Tijd ook dat de rest van de wereld zich verenigt tegen de VS, aan het ongebreideld bloedvergieten door deze terreurstaat moet eindelijk eens een eind komen!! (2 vliegen in 1 klap: zo hoeven mensen niet langer te vluchten naar de EU voor door de VS gestarte illegale oorlogen…..)

In het volgende artikel van Whitney Webb, eerder gepubliceerd op MintPress News, noemt ze het Syrisch Observatorium voor de Mensenrechten (SOHR), jammer daar dit SOHR een propagandaorgaan is voor een aantal terreurgroepen in Syrië en zeker niet zou mogen worden genoemd door journalisten die hun werk wel serieus nemen, dit in tegenstelling tot de journalisten van de reguliere (massa-) media, die zogenaamd onafhankelijk zijn…. De journalisten die hun werk wel serieus nemen zijn voor het overgrote deel te vinden op de sociale media, vandaar ook het gezeur in de politiek en in die reguliere media over ‘fake news’ (nepnieuws), daar die reguliere media steeds meer publiek verliezen…… De politiek bemoeit zich hiermee daar de reguliere media brave vertolkers en verdedigers zijn van de westerse agressie elders…….

US Airstrike Kills 54 Civilians in Syria in Push to Control Syrian Border

July 13, 2018 at 4:14 pm
Written by Whitney Webb
With the U.S. now unable to prevent Syrian government control of the Syria-Jordan border, Friday’s strikes are a sign that the U.S. effort to oust the Syrian government from Abu Kamal is likely to only grow stronger as its occupation of Syrian territory faces an uncertain future.
(MPN) Around midnight on Friday, U.S.-led coalition warplanes in Syria conducted intensive airstrikes near Abu Kamal in the Deir ez-Zor province, with estimates of civilian casualties ranging from 30 to 54. Syrian state media agency SANA has claimed that at least 30 were killed and that most of the dead were women and children. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), often cited by international and particularly Western media, has asserted that 54 were killed.
According to local reports, the U.S.-led coalition strikes targeted the towns of al-Souseh and al-Baghouz Fowqani, east of the Euphrates river in the countryside around Abu Kamal. The bombings resulted in dozens of houses in the towns collapsing, resulting in numerous civilian deaths, as whole families were crushed by the rubble while they were sleeping.
The U.S. coalition did not confirm or deny its role in the strike, stating only that it “may have” been responsible. However, the bombing comes after the coalition announced in early May it would intensify airstrikes targeting Daesh (ISIS), particularly in Eastern Syria along the Syria-Iraq border. Abu Kamal, where last night’s strikes took place, is a strategic border town on the Syria-Iraq border and is the only Syria-Iraq border crossing currently controlled by Syrian government forces.
Western media reports have claimed that Daesh militants were among the dead, but survivors of the attack contest this claim, instead suggesting that they had been targeted for their unwillingness to cooperate with local U.S.-backed militias. Locals told SANA that U.S. claims that the strikes were intended to target Daesh were false and instead suggested that two towns had been targeted for refusing the entry of the U.S.-backed opposition militias, particularly the Qasad militia.
Reports in Arabic media from earlier this year (English translation) have claimed to provide evidence that many former Daesh members have joined the Qasad militia, both in the province of Deir Ez-Zor and al-Hasakah. Such reports are consistent with U.S. support for other militia groups, such as the Deir Ez-Zor Military Council (DMC), that also include significant numbers of former Daesh fighters who had surrendered to the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the proxy force of the coalition, over the course of the past year.

Losing influence elsewhere in Syria, the U.S. sets sights on Abu Kamal

The strike comes at a delicate time for the U.S. coalition in Syria, as its most important alliances, which enable its occupation of more than 30 percent of Syrian territory, threaten to dissolve while local resistance to the presence of foreign troops continues to grow.
MintPress has recently reported on these developments — regarding first the rise of local resistance to the U.S. presence from Arab and Kurdish tribes in U.S.-occupied Syria, and then the agreement between the Syrian government and factions of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG, the backbone of the U.S. proxy force, the SDF) behind the back of the U.S. coalition. Both developments threaten to make the U.S. occupation of Syrian territory not only ultimately unsustainable but indeed short-lived.
The U.S. has also lost influence elsewhere in Syria, particularly in Syria’s south owing to the Syrian government’s recent, highly successful campaign in the area. The offensive has seen the Syrian government reclaim nearly all of the Syrian-Jordan border and is likely to result in the U.S. abandoning its long-standing presence in al-Tanf, the strategic area where the borders of Syria, Jordan and Iraq meet.
The U.S. has maintained a military base at al-Tanf, where it has trained proxy fighters for the past several years, and has occupied a 34-mile zone surrounding that facility. Losing that location is a blow to U.S. influence in Syria and would mean a consolidation of U.S. occupation forces in the Eastern portion of Syria nominally controlled by the SDF.
For that reason, the recent strikes on Abu Kamal are notable, as they build on other recent coalition strikes in the area. Indeed, there is no Daesh presence in Abu Kamal aside from the pockets of Daesh that intermittently attack the Syrian government-held city from the area of Syria occupied by the U.S.
In addition, recent coalition bombings in and around Abu Kamal have shown that these strikes have nothing to do with wiping out Daesh. For instance, another recent coalition strike in the Abu Kamal area, which took place last month, did not target Daesh at all but instead Syrian government forces and allied Iraqi militias. Though the U.S. never publicly admitted responsibility for the attack and an anonymous U.S. official had blamed the strike on Israel, forensic evidence analyzed and collected by Iraqi forces showed that the U.S. was indeed responsible.
The U.S. interest in Abu Kamal is aimed at wresting the strategic outpost from the control of the Syrian government, which would result in the Syrian government losing its only road access to both Iraq and Iran. Cutting off this supply line, particularly the connection between Syria and Iran, has long been acknowledged as an important U.S. goal in its occupation of Northeastern Syria.
With the U.S. now unable to prevent Syrian government control of the Syria-Jordan border, Friday’s strikes are a sign that the U.S. effort to oust the Syrian government from Abu Kamal is likely to only grow stronger as its occupation of Syrian territory faces an uncertain future. If the high death tolls from the recent strike are any indication, the U.S. seems to have few qualms about killing scores of civilians in pursuit of its geopolitical goals in Syria.

====================================
* Waaruit maar één ding geconcludeerd kan worden: de VS is inderdaad verantwoordelijk voor die luchtaanvallen!

** Zie: ‘VS vermoordde meer dan 20 miljoen mensen sinds het einde van WOII……..‘ en verder: ‘List of wars involving the United States‘ en: VS buitenlandbeleid sinds WOII: een lange lijst van staatsgrepen en oorlogen………. en: ‘CIA 70 jaar: 70 jaar moorden, martelen, coups plegen, nazi’s beschermen, media manipulatie enz. enz………‘ en: ‘List of wars involving the United States

NAVO defensie uitgaven naar 4% van BBP? Het merendeel van de Duitsers wil de VS militairen hun land uit!

De psychopaat Trump heeft ‘t voor elkaar gekregen, de NAVO lidstaten stemden min of meer in met zijn nieuwe eis (althans men ‘durfde’, of beter gezegd men wilde daar niets tegen inbrengen), dat de leden minstens 4% van het bruto binnenlands product (BBP) moeten uitgeven aan defensie uh oorlogsvoering. Merkel die nogal werd geschoffeerd door Trump zou schoorvoetend akkoord zijn gegaan met de 4% eis van Trump…… (al zal het nog vele jaren duren voordat het zover is, een tijdstip waarop Merkel al lang afgeserveerd zal zijn als premier…)

De VS is momenteel minstens in 4 oorlogen verwikkeld, heeft meer dan 800 bases over de wereld, vermoord verdachten middels een groot aantal drone aanvallen (waarbij meer dan 90% van de slachtoffers niet eens verdacht is), is doende met een ruimteschild en heeft bovendien een paar raketbases in Oost-Europa en Oost-Azië gebouwd….. Waarom zouden we ons daar in godsnaam mee moeten meten? Wat is dit voor kul? De politici en media die je vertellen dat wij meer moeten uitgeven aan defensie weten dit dondersgoed, kortom je wordt belazerd waar je bij staat*!

Uit onderzoek blijkt nu dat een meerderheid van de Duitse bevolking de zogenaamde Amerikanen in het land, maar liefst al meer dan 73 jaar aanwezig met nu naar schatting (!!) rond de 35.000 militairen, als de bliksem terugkeren naar hun eigen land. Daar zou ik me graag bij aansluiten vandaar dit cliché: Yankee go home! (and never return!)
Whitney Webb, de schrijver van het hieronder opgenomen artikel stelt dat er bijna 35.000 VS militairen in Duitsland zijn. Echter dat is maar zeer de vraag, daar het Pentagon daar geen uitspreken meer over wenst te doen en als men het daar nodig acht, zelfs zonder inmenging van de Trump administratie en controle van de senaat plus het huis van afgevaardigden, naar eigen goeddunken extra militairen mag inzetten waar men het nodig acht…….
Trump zou verbaasd zijn geweest over het grote aantal militairen in Duitsland en overwogen hebben een groot aantal van hen terug te roepen….. Echter dat is zeer tegen de wil van het Pentagon en Webb vermoedt dan ook dat dit een strategie is van Trump om druk op de ketel te houden….. Lullig dan voor Merkel en haar regering dat de meerderheid van de Duitsers tegen aanwezigheid van de VS militairen in eigen land is en een meerderheid van de Duitsers zelfs tegen verdere verhogingen van de budgetten voor het militarisme is, militarisme dat de laatste 17 jaar weer in volle stinkende glorie is hersteld, met in het Midden-Oosten de vreselijke massamoorden van dien: deze eeuw al meer dan 2 miljoen vermoorde slachtoffers door de grootscheepse VS terreur……..

4% van het BBP zodat Trump mooi het dodelijk speelgoed van zijn wapenindustrie kan slijten aan leeghoofdige NAVO lidstaten, zoals Nederland, dat zo tuk is op de EU, vervolgens geen EU straaljager kocht, maar er één uit de VS aanschafte >> de JSF…… De JSF van Lockheed Martin mag volgens de huidige maatstaven niet eens straaljager genoemd worden, daar de JSF (of F-35 Lightning II, kortweg F-35) niet voldoet aan de normen daarvoor….. Zo stijgt, klimt en rent dit peperdure onding niet snel genoeg, het kan zich nog net meten met de A-10 Thunderbolt uit de 70er jaren…… Rusland heeft het stealth systeem van het straalvliegtuig gekraakt en de Chinezen hebben een paar jaar geleden al een blauwdruk van dit onding weten te bemachtigen…… Tot slot: de JSF kan niet gebruikt worden als de VS het niet eens is met het doel voor de inzet, het Pentagon kan beslissen op afstand de toestellen aan de grond te houden……. Degenen die voor de JSF hebben gelobbyd en dan bedoel ik de politici (van VVD, CDA, PvdA, D66 en ‘Christen’Unie) en legertop zouden strafrechtelijk vervolgd moeten worden voor het misleiden van het volk en het in een diepe donkere put donderen van miljarden aan belastinggeld……. (en maar zeiken om meer geld voor ‘defensie….’) Overigens is het wel zeker dat deze lobbyisten t.z.t. beloond zullen worden, even wachten tot men uit de ‘publieke kijker’ is (dus een paar jaar na de militaire of politieke loopbaan), ofwel hier is ook nog eens sprake van omkoping ofwel corruptie…..

Germans Actually Want US Troops to Get the Hell Out of Their Country

July 12, 2018 at 10:17 pm
Written by Whitney Webb
(MPN) — After over 70 years, Germans have apparently had enough of the U.S. troop presence in their country, the second largest presence of U.S. troops abroad after Japan. According to a YouGov poll conducted by Germany’s DPA news agency, 42% of Germans support a complete withdrawal of U.S. troops in the country with 37% of Germany wanting them to stay and 21% undecided. Currently, Germany hosts close to 35,000 U.S. soldiers and between 30 and 40 U.S. military bases.
The poll also found that support for withdrawal came from across the German political spectrum.
For instance, 67% of voters from the left-wing Die Linke party were found to support a U.S. troop withdrawal while 55% of the far-right, nationalist AfD party also expressed support for their removal. The Green party of Germany also backed withdrawal by 48%. Support was lowest among voters of the CDU party, the political party of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, at 35%.
Other findings from the poll show that there is little popular support among Germans for militarism in general, but particularly U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent demand that NATO members such as Germany work to increase their military spending to a new target of 4% of national GDP. Some German political analysts have asserted that Trump’s demand is aimed at increasing European purchases of U.S.-manufactured weapons systems.
On this point, however, the poll found that only 15% of Germans support increasing military spending to just 2% of GDP. Furthermore, 36% of Germans feel that the country already spends too much on military spending. Yet, despite the lack of support for increasing military spending among Germans, Merkel stated on Thursday that, after a “very fundamental” discussion during the recent and “very intense” NATO summit, Germany must spend more on NATO defense.
Even though he has pushed Germany and other NATO countries to push for increased military spending despite a lack of popular support, Trump could still prove an unlikely ally for Germans eager to see at least a reduction in the number of U.S. troops stationed throughout the country.
Indeed, just two weeks ago, Trump was allegedly very surprised to learn the high number of American soldiers stationed in Germany. According to a report in the Washington Post, Trump’s surprise prompted him to ask the Department of Defense to analyze the feasibility of conducting a large-scale withdrawal or transfer of the U.S. troop presence stationed in Germany.
However, U.S. government officials have seemed to have talked Trump out of actually taking action on a withdrawal of troops from Germany. Notably, U.S. military officials, such as retired Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges who commanded U.S. Army Europe until late last year, have asserted that any reduction in the U.S. military presence in Germany would be a “colossal mistake.” Hodges further claimed that Russia, particularly Russian President Vladimir Putin, would emerge the “big winner” and that any reduction of the American military presence in Germany would “embolden Russia in terms of its adventurist, intimidating foreign policy.” In an interview with Stars and Stripes, he also expressed confidence that Trump’s suggestion of a troop withdrawal was just a negotiating tactic and that “Pentagon planners would agree to keep troop levels in Germany on the current scale.”

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

* De NAVO lidstaten Duitsland, Frankrijk, Groot-Brittannië en Italië geven 3 keer zoveel uit aan ‘defensie’ dan Rusland, waar de gezamenlijke NAVO lidstaten meer dan 7 keer zoveel uitgeven aan ‘defensie’ dan Rusland en China samen……… En toch moeten we meer uitgeven aan oorlogsvoering, illegale oorlogen die bovendien terreur op de EU straten hebben uitgelokt…..

PS: bij plaatsing van dit bericht vergeten: 2 landen die wel fiks veel uitgeven aan ‘defensie’, zijn Turkije en Griekenland, waarbij ze elkaar als vijand zien en daarom veel uitgeven aan defensie, waar Turkije natuurlijk ook voor een ander doel veel aan ‘defensie’ uitgeeft: het uitvoeren van de terreur die deze reli-fascistische dictatuur voert tegen de Koerdische bevolking binnen en buiten haar grenzen…….

BP stelt in milieuplan dat een olieramp op zee goed is voor de lokale economie……….

Ja hoor, het was weer zover beste bezoeker: toen ik het hieronder opgenomen artikel onder ogen kreeg vloog de koffie met een noodsnelheid tegen het raam, dit daar ik me danig verslikte bij het lezen van de kop…..


British Petroleum, ofwel BP had het gore lef om bij een bod voor een boorvergunning in een gebied voor de Australische zuidkust: de Grote Australische Bocht, in feite een groot zeereservaat, een milieuplan toe te voegen, waarin valt te lezen hoe men bij BP denkt over een olieramp (zoals bijvoorbeeld die in de Golf van Mexico, veroorzaakt door BP, een aantal jaren geleden).

In dat plan stond o.a. te lezen dat een olieramp (die uiteraard niet zo werd genoemd) goed is voor de lokale economie van het getroffen gebied…. Voorts zou de bevolking geen probleem hebben met een dergelijke ramp, wat men weergaf met de woorden ‘sociaal acceptabel….’ Ook aandeelhouders zouden er geen probleem mee hebben, dat laatste is dan tegelijk een enorme open deur intrappen, immers aandeelhouders hebben maar één doel: zoveel mogelijk verdienen en als de aarde daarvoor opgeofferd moet worden, het zij zo……… Voor dat laatste is bewijs te over……

Hoe durft BP dergelijke zaken alleen al te denken, laat staan ze pontificaal als een ‘mooie bijkomstigheid’ voor een enorme milieuramp in de openbaarheid te brengen………. Alsof de dieren die getroffen worden niet meer tellen, bovendien wordt daarmee het toerisme (veelal ook groot in kustgebieden) voor jaren de nek omgedraaid…….

De hoogste tijd dat oliemaatschapppijen worden aangeklaagd voor hun enorme aandeel in de klimaatverandering, die men daar godbetert nog durft te ontkennen, terwijl uit eigen onderzoek (teruggaand tot de 70er jaren van de vorige eeuw) blijkt dat de verbranding van fossiele brandstoffen inderdaad de klimaatverandering verooorzaakt…….

Oliemaatschappijen zouden na een giga boete verplicht moeten worden jaarlijks een fiks deel van de winst af te staan om de gevolgen van de klimaatverandering nog enigszins te herstellen en met dat geld proberen de klimaatverandering een beetje af te remmen, wat dat laatste betreft: dat is het enige wat de mens nog kan doen (maatregelen om de klimaatverandering af te remmen: bijvoorbeeld door het bekostigen van warmtepompsystemen, waterstofontwikkeling, windmolens en zonnepanelen…)

‘Economische kansen’ door een vreselijke olieramp, veroorzaakt door BP……. Jezus wat een geteisem!! (moet je eens zien, de enorme bedragen die worden betaald aan de top van die bedrijven, die maar met één ding bezig zijn, de aarde zo snel mogelijk om zeep helpen…..)…

BP Claims Oil Spills Are “Socially Acceptable” and “Boost” Local Economies

April 18, 2018 at 7:42 am
Written by Truth In Media

(TIM) — British Petroleum, better known as BP, sought to convince the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (NOPSEMA) of Australia that a potential oil spill off the country’s coast would provide “a welcome boost to local economies.” BP made the claim in 2016 in an environmental plan written to convince NOPSEMA to approve the company’s bid to drill for oil in the Great Australian Bight, a pristine region along Australia’s southern coast.

BP has a troublesome record when it comes to oil spills, having been responsible for the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the largest marine oil spill in history. The disaster, which leaked 3 million barrels of crude oil into the surrounding environment, created numerous “dead zones” – or marine areas devoid of oxygen and thus life – and also devastated local economies, some of which are still struggling to recover.

The documents, obtained by the London-based website Climate Home News through freedom of information laws, claim that the “increased activity” that results from oil spill cleanup operations would jump-start local economies. It further claimed that such environmental disasters were “socially acceptable” and did not present “unresolved stakeholder concerns.”

As an environmental regulator, NOPSEMA did not agree with BP’s rosy picture of the aftermath of a major oil spill, citing the impact that such a spill would have on the region’s ecosystems, which are home to many important species and are a key driver for regional tourism. It also raised concern that the sounds generated by drilling activity in the area could present a danger to whales and dolphins.

NOPSEMA also noted that BP failed to consider several likely ecological effects of its drilling plan and did not provide a realistic plan of how the company would respond to an oil spill in the area. NOPSEMA rejected the 2016 plan drafted by BP, and it was the second time NOPSEMA had rejected a previous environmental safety plan written by BP in 2015.

BP, when contacted for comment regarding its apparent lack of concern over oil spills, asserted that the correspondence does not “represent the final views of BP” and also noted that BP had abandoned its bid to drill in the area after citing “better options” for investment elsewhere.

However, Statoil – a Norway-based oil company – took over BP’s plans for oil exploration in the area. Statoil has yet to submit an environmental plan to NOPSEMA. Given the backlash BP has received over its environmental plan, Statoil’s version is unlikely to argue that oil spills improve local economies and are considered socially acceptable by the general public.

By Whitney Webb / Republished with permission / TruthInMedia.com / Report a typo
============================================
Zie ook:
Scott Morrison (premier Australië) moest bezoek aan door bosbrand getroffen gebied afbreken en vertrok met de staart tussen de benen

Australië staat in brand terwijl de regering milieuactivisten straft voor het zich uitspreken tegen de oorzaken van de klimaatverandering

Filipijnen geen orkaanseizoen, maar het jaarrond tropische cyclonen

Australië staat olieboringen toe in de Grote Australische Bocht, inclusief seismische ontploffingen

Australië slaat alarm over koraalriffen…….. AUW!!!

Leard Forest: grootste kolenmijn ooit dreigt gerealiseerd te worden in dit vele duizenden jaren oude Australisch bos………

Het Groot Barrièrerif, dreigt te worden gesloopt voor een grote kolenhaven……..

Australië exporteert dagelijks één miljoen ton steenkool, dit i.h.k.v. de klimaatverandering en de afgelopen klimaattop……..‘ (daar wordt jaarlijks nog eens 10 miljoen ton aan toegevoegd….)

Coca-Cola betaalt wetenschappers om haar producten te promoten en voor weerleggen kritiek……

Shell, ExxonMobil en andere oliemaatschappijen gaan 180 miljard dollar investeren in plasticproductie………

Bas Heijne weet, geenszins ‘onbehagelijk’, niet wat te denken van de klimaatverandering……. OEI!!!

ExxonMobil vervolgd voor ‘misleiding…’ Nou zeg maar het op grote schaal bedonderen van de kluit!!

Shell was al in 1989 overtuigd van klimaatverandering………….

Exxon lobbyist (politicus) dagvaardt milieugroepen voor kennis bij Exxon over klimaatverandering…….

Rusland beschuldigd GB van het regisseren gifgasaanval Douma en zegt daar bewijzen voor te hebben

Dagelijks worden we in Nederland (en de rest van het westen) met fikse superlatieven voorgelogen dat Syrië verantwoordelijk is voor de gifgasaanval in Douma, terwijl daar nog steeds geen bewijs voor is geleverd, sterker nog: de illegale aanval tegen Syrische doelen door de VS, GB en Frankrijk van afgelopen vrijdag op zaterdagnacht, een wraakactie voor die gifgasaanval, werd NB uitgevoerd op de dag voordat de internationale onderzoekscommissie van de OPCW haar werk zou starten in Syrië……..

Volgens wapeninspecteurs van de VN beschikt Syrië al jaren niet meer over chemische wapens, noch zou het land beschikken over faciliteiten om chemische wapens te ontwikkelen of te produceren…….. Toch zou volgens de misdadige coalitie o.l.v. de VS, een opslagplaats voor chemische wapens zijn getroffen en zou een wetenschappelijk onderzoekscentrum plat zijn gegooid, een centrum waar men chemische wapens zou produceren……
Wat betreft het laatste doel: werknemers van dit onderzoekscentrum stellen dat het gaat om een farmaceutisch bedrijf dat medicijnen produceert…….. Dat is toch echt iets anders dan chemische wapens ontwikkelen…… Ook het andere doel was geen opslagplaats voor chemische wapens, maar voor ‘normale wapens…’
De schrijver van het hieronder opgenomen artikel, Whitney Webb haalt voorts ‘de getuigen’ van de gifgasaanval aan: de White Helmets, een in feite door GB opgetuigde groep (betaald door GB, de VS, Japan en… Nederland!) die zogenaamd hulp verleent, maar intussen al een aantal keren door de mand is gevallen. Zo is aangetoond dat deze W.H. Hebben meegewerkt aan executies door ‘gematigde rebellen’ en heeft de organisatie meerdere keren beeldmateriaal gebruikt, die niet eens in Syrië werd opgenomen…… Zoals je hiervoor al kon lezen: het is bekend dat deze White Helmets samenwerken met Al Qaida Syrië en nog een paar terreurgroepen, waaronder Jaysh al-Islam…….
Voorts is meermaals aangetoond dat de vermeende gifgasaanvallen, die door de White Helmets aan het Syrische leger werden toegeschreven, in werkelijkheid zijn gepleegd door deze zogenaamde gematigde rebellen……. Je kan daarvoor zelfs de White Helmets schuld aanrekenen, immers zij waren op de hoogte van aanstaande gifgasaanvallen, maar hebben de bevolking nooit gewaarschuwd……. ‘Bijzonder vreemd ook’, dat nooit 1 lid van deze organisatie is omgekomen door gifgas, terwijl men wel altijd ter plaatse was…………
De White Helmets worden overigens gefinancierd door de VS, Groot-Brittannië, Japan en…… Nederland! (dat laatste staat niet in het artikel van Webb, maar is wel een feit!)

In maart onderschepte het reguliere Syrische leger een wapenleverantie voor terreurgroep Jaysh al-Islam, die het gebied in Oost-Ghouta in handen had, onder de wapens vond men ook gifgas……..
Zoals eerder gemeld op deze plek (wat niet in het artikel van Webb terugkomt): waarom zou het Syrische leger een gifgasaanval uitvoeren, terwijl het de strijd in feite al had gewonnen…??? Daarnaast is het zoals gezegd bekend dat het Syrische leger niet over gifgas beschikt, terwijl het een feit is dat de ‘gematigde rebellen’ wel beschikken over voorraden gifgas…….. (waarmee het westen geen probleem heeft…..)

Russia Accuses UK of Masterminding Gas Attack in Syria and Claims to Have Proof

April 16, 2018 at 12:53 pm
Written by Truth In Media
(TIM) Hours before the United States, the UK, and France carried out “limited” strikes last Saturday morning, the Russian military presented what it claimed to be proof that the chemical weapons attack used as the pretext for those strikes was staged at the behest of the UK government.

De Russische generaal Gerasimov

During a Friday briefing, the Russian Defense Ministry showed interviews with medical professionals reported to work in the only functional hospital in Douma – the suburb of the Syrian capital Damascus where the attacks are said to have taken place. In their testimony, the two men asserted that the footage of the alleged chemical attack was taken after a Syrian air strike occurred and that the affected people shown in the video were suffering from smoke poisoning. They stated that a false claim of chemical weapons use was then circulated, leading concerned family members to douse those affected with water.

The Russian military then asserted that the White Helmets, the foreign-funded “humanitarian” group active in Syria, were pressured by the UK government to “speed up” a provocation that they had been preparing in order to push for Western intervention.
British UN Ambassador Karen Pierce called the allegations “grotesque,” “a blatant lie” and “the worst piece of fake news we’ve yet seen from the Russian propaganda machine.”
The main group that has provided footage and evidence purporting to show the chemical weapons attack in Douma are the White Helmets. Syria’s White Helmets, while they have largely been portrayed in Western media as a humanitarian first responder group, were actually founded in Turkey in 2013 by a British mercenary named James Le Mesurier. Le Mesurier is a former officer in the British military and also formerly worked for British intelligence. He eventually left his work with the British government to join with the Olive Group before it merged with Blackwater-Academi to become Constellis Holdings. He then worked in Abu Dhabi before moving to Turkey and founding the White Helmets.
To found the group, Le Mesurier raised $300,000 in seed funding provided by the UK, the U.S. and Japan, according to journalist Vanessa Beeley. Since its founding, the White Helmets have received over $123 million from 2013 to 2016 from the U.S. and UK governments, as well as Western NGOs and Gulf state monarchies. In addition, during the past five years, the White Helmets have been instrumental in blaming the Syrian government for any and all chemical weapons attacks in Syria, acting as both witnesses and responders to events that were later reported to be the work of the armed opposition in Syria or staged.
In Mid-March, the Syrian Arab Army intercepted a truck containing weapons and ammunition destined for the militant rebel groups in the area where the chemical weapons attack is said to have occurred. Among the items found were canisters apparently containing smoke grenades made in Salisbury, England – where the UK government has a chemical weapons laboratory.
Regardless of what information emerges from Douma regarding the alleged chemical weapons attack, the UK and its allies have already unilaterally attacked Syria even though they have admitted that they have no evidence that the attack even took place, beyond social media posts and YouTube videos created by controversial groups with ties to U.K. intelligence.
By Whitney Webb / Republished with permission / TruthInMedia.com / Report a typo

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

en: ‘Russische volk wordt geadviseerd zich voor te bereiden op een nucleaire oorlog……

en: ‘Gifgasaanval vooropgezet spel om VS actie te rechtvaardigen, waarbij GB de spelers opdracht gaf dit toneelspel snel uit te voeren…….. ‘False flag gelukt’: Syrië gebombardeerd zonder enig bewijs voor schuld…..

en: ‘Rusland voorspelde ‘de gifgasaanval’ in Oost-Ghouta en de reactie daarop van de VS…..

en: ‘In Douma vond geen gifgasaanval plaats aldus gelauwerd journalist Robert Fisk…..

en: ‘De OPCW inspecteurs en hun werk in Douma n.a.v. ‘gifgasaanval…’

en: ‘Wapenfabrikanten die de illegale raketbeschietingen op Syrië mogelijk maakten, zagen hun aandelen met 10 miljard stijgen………

en: ‘OPCW team in Douma stelt dat Syrië en Rusland niets hebben veranderd dan wel verwijderd op de plaats van de ‘gisfgasaanval’

en: ‘‘False flag terror’ bestaat wel degelijk: bekentenissen en feiten over heel smerige zaken……….

en: ‘Assad heeft geen gifgas gebruikt tegen de Syrische bevolking!

en:Syrië: verslaggever Bartlett prikt leugens reguliere media door

en: ‘Syrië wacht andermaal een geplande gasaanval van ‘gematigde rebellen……..’

Israëlische terreur in Negev: dorp voor 114de keer ‘gebulldozerd’

Anti-Media meldde eergisteren, dat het Palestijnse Bedoeïenendorp al-Araqib voor de 114de keer werd gebulldozerd…… U denkt wellicht, 114 keer, is dat niet wat overdreven, maar zelfs één keer zou één keer teveel zijn!!

De Palestijnse bedoeïenen wonen al een paar duizend jaar in de Negev, maar als het de fascistische apartheidsregering van Israël behaagd, verklaart het bedoeïenen dorpen als niet bestaand en dus illegaal. Dit terwijl illegale Israëlische nederzettingen in het gebied mogen worden uitgebreid, sterker nog, deze worden niet zelden gebouwd op de plek waar eerst een Palestijns bedoeïenendorp werd vernietigd door de fascistische Israëlische overheidsdiensten………

Al vaker gemeld op deze plek, Israël, haar politie en het Israëlische leger gebruiken nazi-Duitse methoden als vergelding, iets dat begin negentiger jaren zelfs werd toegegeven door officieren uit het Israëlische leger…… Nog een staaltje nazi-Duitse terreur: de bewoners van al-Araqib worden verantwoordelijk gesteld voor de kosten van het bulldozeren van hun huizen, deze kosten zijn nu al ruim de half miljoen dollar gepasseerd……….

Al-Araqib is één van de 35 dorpen, die Israël niet erkend als bestaand……. Lees het artikel Whitney Webb over deze onverdraaglijke gang van zaken. Zoals gewoonlijk is ook voor deze vorm van Israëlische terreur amper of geen aandacht bij de politiek en de reguliere (‘onafhankelijke’) media in ons land

Israeli Bulldozers Demolish Palestinian Village for 114th Time in Seven Years

June 19, 2017 at 8:04 pm
Written by Whitney Webb
Israeli bulldozers flattened a village inhabited by the ancient Palestinian Bedouins, a tribe that has lived on the land for thousands of years. Israeli authorities have systematically run the indigenous Bedouins off of their land to pave the way for Jewish-only settlements.
(MPN) — Israel Land Authority (ILA) officials, along with Israeli police and several bulldozers, raided and then demolished the Bedouin village of al-Araqib in the Negev region this week.
The demolition marked the 114th time that the ILA has destroyed the village, with the first time taking place in 2010 and the most recent prior to Wednesday’s demolition taking place just last month.
Most of the structures that were demolished on Wednesday were tin homes that village residents had built over the course of the last month in order to continue living in the area.
But while the residents of al-Araqib are grappling with the most recent demolition that has wiped out their village, Israeli Jewish communities in the region continue to expand on Palestinian land.
Last, year, the ILA approved five new Jewish-only residential settlements in the Negev, two of which are located where “unrecognized” Palestinian Bedouin villages currently stand.
Several rights groups have argued that the demolition of Bedouin villages is directly related to the expansion of illegal Jewish settlements, describing the policy as a means of removing the indigenous Palestinian population in order to create even more settlements for Jewish-only Israelis.
Since Israel’s inception in 1948, white Jewish-only settlements have been built on indigenous Palestinian land after the indigenous population has been ethnically cleansed in order to accommodate European Jews in beginning their new lives in Israel.
The historic Palestinian Bedouins have lived in the villages since they were forcibly transferred to the sites by an Israeli military order issued in 1956. However, the Bedouins significantly predate the state of Israel, as they have lived in the area for thousands of years as the original Arab ethnic group of the Middle East.
ILA officials have been repeatedly accused by residents of carrying out demolitions with little consideration for the village’s residents. Indeed, instead of providing any resources for the now-homeless villagers, al-Araqib’s residents have been ordered by the Israeli government to pay for the cumulative cost of the 114 demolitions that have been carried out since 2010, a figure which stands at more than 2 million shekels, or roughly $541,000.
However, the Palestinian Bedouins – despite the constant destruction of their homes – have remained defiant, refusing to relocate. Following last month’s demolition, al-Araqib resident Sayyah al-Turi told the Ma’an News Agency “All demolition crimes will not scare us or stop us from rebuilding our homes and holding on to our lands. We will stay here despite the injustice and criminal demolitions, we will not submit to their plans of uprooting and displacing us.”
Al-Araqib is one of 35 Bedouin villages that the Israeli government considers “unrecognized,” even thoughmore than half of the estimated 160,000 Bedouins living in the Negev region reside in such villages. The “unrecognized” classification also prevents Bedouins living in these villages from developing or expanding their communities. It has also led to Israeli authorities refusing to connect the villages to national water and electric grids and refusing to offer their residents healthcare and educational services, despite the fact that the Bedouins are technically Israeli citizens.

Settlement activity on the rise

However, the Israeli demolition of Palestinian housing has become more prominent in 2017, as pushes to expand Israeli settlements and the demolition of indigenous Palestinian homes have both spiked since the year began.
The Israeli NGO Peace Now reported earlier this month that the number of settlements approved in the first half of 2017 is nearly triple the number that was approved in all of 2016, with 7,721 housing units approved since January compared to 2,657 over the entire course of last year.
Demolitions of Palestinian homes within Israel have also picked up in the first half of the year, beginning with a deadly pre-dawn demolition raid on the Bedouin village of Umm al-Hiran in January. A new Jewish-Israeli town called “Hiran” is set to take the village’s place.
The push to expand illegal settlements at all costs has recently brought international condemnation against the Israeli government, with the United States, the United Kingdom and Japan condemning the expansion of illegal settlements, saying this phenomenon is “not conducive” to the peace process.
However, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seems less than concerned with such statements, as evidenced by his comments at a ceremony celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Six-Day War earlier this month. At the ceremony, Netanyahu promised an audience of Jewish settlers that he was “doing whatever is needed to protect the Jewish settlement enterprise.”
It will likely take more than stern words from foreign governments to convince the Israeli government to abandon its illegal activities, which have compounded the suffering of indigenous Palestinians who are losing their land to modern-day colonization.

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

===================================
Zie ook:
Palestijnse bedoeïenen: vergeten en verjaagd‘ MO (Mondiaal Nieuws) 17 oktober 2013.

De geschiedenis van de Palestijnse Bedoeïenen in de Negev-Naqab‘ (Een Ander Joods Geluid, 15 juni 2017)

Israëlische terreur: man wordt gedwongen z’n huis te slopen op de dag van z’n bruiloft…….

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Intercept Has A Source Burning Problem

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

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

The Intercept’s corporate dark side

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mijn excuus voor de belabberde vormgeving.