Caitlin
Johnstone schreef een artikel op haar site waarin ze een
uitspraak van Bolton aanhaalde, waarin hij openlijk stelde dat het
goed is om te liegen over oorlog (en oorlogsmisdaden, iets dat
oorlogsmisdadiger Bolton er uiteraard niet bij vertelde)

Johnstone
kreeg van Whitney Webb een video uit 2010 waarin psychopaat Bolton deze en
andere ongelofelijke uitspraken durfde te doen. Alsof het zijn zaak
extra zou ondersteunen haalde Bolton een uitspraak aan van Winston
Churchill (die in de 20er jaren van de vorige eeuw nog mosterdgas
inzette tegen bedoeïenen in wat nu Irak is…..), de vertaling van deze uitspraak komt ongeveer neer op: de waarheid in een oorlog is zo belangrijk dat deze omringd
moet worden door leugen lijfwachten….. (de Engelse versie die Bolton gebruikte vind je in het hieronder opgenomen artikel van Johnstone)

Om zijn
uitspraak nog meer kracht bij te zetten stelde Bolton dat het
noodzakelijk was om te liegen over D-day….. Alsof dit ook maar
enigszins is te vergelijken met de illegale oorlogen die de VS sinds
WOII voert, dit wel of niet in combinatie met een geheime
economische oorlog, om zo een opstand te veroorzaken, waarmee een
regime verandering zou kunnen worden doorgedrukt…..

Als het voorgaande niet lukt staat uiteraard het scenario van een VS invasie nog ter
beschikking, ook al een beproefd recept van de VS. Naast geheime
militaire CIA acties en het vermoorden van verdachten middels drones (waar meer dan
90% van de slachtoffers niet eens werd verdacht), heeft de VS sinds
het eind van WOII meer dan 22,5 miljoen mensen vermoord (waarbij de VS
deels ook de NAVO gebruikte, waarover dit land permanent het
opperbevel voert…)…..

Lees het
ontluisterend verhaal van Johnstone en zegt het voort, we zijn meer
dan overtijd als het gaat om het blind zijn bij het overgrote deel
van de westerse bevolking voor de grootschalige terreur die de VS
gebruikt tegen een fiks deel van de wereld…….. Terreur ook uit
onze naam, zo was Nederland betrokken bij de voorbereiding van de
oorlog tegen Irak, die ons land ook nog eens politiek en militair
steunde……. Terreur die mede met ons belastinggeld werd en wordt uitgeoefend….. 

Om over de enorme kosten die oorlogsvoering met zich meebrengen maar te zwijgen, kosten
voor wederopbouw van het land dat door de VS in puin werd gelegd,
kosten voor behandeling van oorlogsslachtoffers en de kosten die
worden gemaakt voor vluchtelingen (waar de ellende voor deze mensen
niet eens in geld is uit te drukken…), vluchtelingen die met vele
duizenden al zijn verdronken in de Middellandse en Egeïsche Zee…..
Kosten als de 6 miljard euro die de EU aan Turkije gaf om
vluchtelingen af te schrikken, gevangen te zetten en tegen te houden als ze willen vluchten naar de EU, terwijl EU landen, zoals gezegd, mede hoofdverantwoordelijk zijn voor
de reden waarom deze mensen hun moederland ontvluchtten……

De brutaliteit die oorlogshitsers als de topman van Washington Institute Of Near East Policy (WINEP), Patrick Clawson, ten toon spreiden is ongekend, zo pleitte deze smerige oorlogshitser openlijk voor een false flag operatie om zo een reden te creëren waarmee de VS Iran (zogenaamd legitiem) aan kan vallen (de link naar dat gebeuren vind je in het artikel van Johnstone). Met die strijdbijl heeft de VS al veel vaker gehakt, neem de reden voor deelname van de VS aan de Eerste en Tweede Wereldoorlog, of de oorlog van de VS tegen Noord-Vietnam……

Het artikel van Johnstone nam ik over van Anti-Media:

That
Time John Bolton Said It’s Good to Lie About War

May
16, 2019 at 8:37 am

Written
by Caitlin
Johnstone

(CJ Opinion) — Journalist
Whitney Webb recently tweeted a
2010 video clip I’d never seen before featuring US National
Security Advisor John Bolton defending the use of deception in
advancing military agendas, which highlights something we should all
be paying attention to as Trump administration foreign policy becomes
increasingly Boltonized.

On
a December 2010 episode of Fox News’ Freedom
Watch,
Bolton and the show’s host Andrew Napolitano were debating
about recent WikiLeaks publications,
and naturally the subject of government secrecy came up.

“Now
I want to make the case for secrecy in government when it comes to
the conduct of national security affairs, and possibly for deception
where that’s appropriate,” Bolton
said.
“You know Winston Churchill said during World War Two that in
wartime truth is so important it should be surrounded by a bodyguard
of lies.”

“Do
you really believe that?” asked an incredulous Napolitano.

“Absolutely,”
Bolton replied.

“You
would lie in order to preserve the truth?”

“If
I had to say something I knew was false to protect American national
security, I would do it,” Bolton answered.

“I
don’t think we’re often faced with that difficulty, but would I
lie about where the D-Day invasion was going to take place to deceive
the Germans, you’d better believe it,” Bolton continued.

“Why
do people in the government think that the laws of society or the
rules don’t apply to

them?”
Napolitano asked.

“Because
they are not dealing in the civil society we live in under the
Constitution,” Bolton replied. “They are dealing in the anarchic
environment internationally where different rules apply.”

“But
you took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and the Constitution
mandates certain openness and certain fairness,” Napolitano
protested. “You’re willing to do away with that in order to
attain a temporary military goal?”

“I
think as Justice Jackson said in a famous decision, the Constitution
is not a suicide pact,” Bolton said. “And I think defending the
United States from foreign threats does require actions that in a
normal business environment in the United States we would find
unprofessional. I don’t make any apology for it.”

So
that’s a thing. And it’s important for us to know it’s a thing
because of the way things are heating up in Iran right now, since
Bolton’s fingerprints are
all over it.

Bolton
has long been calling
for war with Iran and
in a paid speech in July 2017 told
his

pro-egime
change MEK terror cult audience that
they would be celebrating the successful overthrow of the Iranian
government together before 2019. Now we’re seeing threat
alarms being elevated and fearmongering
about Iranian missiles being
circulated, with reports being leaked
to the press of
possible plans to send 120,000 US troops to the region.

This
is an environment that is ripe for deceptions of all sorts, and,
given what Bolton said on live television nearly a decade ago, we
would all do very well to remain very, very skeptical of any and all
news we hear about Iran going forward. If for example you hear that
within this environment of escalated tensions and military posturing
Iran or one of its “proxies” has attacked the United States in
some way, your immediate response should be one of intense skepticism
about what the mass media talking heads are telling you to believe.

Back
in 2012 at a forum for the Washington Institute Of Near East Policy (WINEP) think tank, the group’s Director of Research Patrick Clawson openly
talked about the possibility of using a false flag to
provoke a war with Iran.

“I
frankly think that crisis initiation is really tough, and it’s very
hard for me to see how the United States president can get us to war
with Iran,” Clawson
began.

(Can
I just pause here to note what a bizarre series of words that is?
“Get us to war with Iran?”

Get
us to the thing that every sane human being wants to avoid with every
fiber of their being? You want to “get us to” there? This is not
the kind of thing normal humans say. You only hear this kind of
insanity in the DC swamp where creatures like John Bolton have their
roots.)

“Which
leads me to conclude that if in fact compromise is not coming, that
the traditional way that America gets to war is what would be best
for US interests,” Clawson added. “Some people might think that
Mr. Roosevelt wanted to get us into the war… you may recall we had
to wait for Pearl Harbor. Some people might think that Mr. Wilson
wanted to get us into World War One; you may recall we had to wait
for the Lusitania episode. Some people might think that Mr. Johnson
wanted to get us into Vietnam; you may recall we had to wait for the
Gulf of Tonkin episode. We didn’t go to war with Spain until the
USS Maine exploded. And may I point out that Mr. Lincoln did not feel
that he could call out the Army until Fort Sumter was attacked, which
is why he ordered the commander at Fort Sumter to do exactly that
thing which the South Carolinians said would cause an attack.”

“So
if, in fact, the Iranians aren’t going to compromise, it would be
best if somebody else started the war,” Clawson continued. “One
can combine other means of pressure with sanctions. I mentioned that
explosion on August 17th. We could step up the pressure. I mean look
people, Iranian submarines periodically go down. Some day, one of
them might not come up. Who would know why? We can do a variety of
things, if we wish to increase the pressure (I’m not advocating
that) but I’m just suggesting that this is not an either/or
proposition — just sanctions have to succeed or other things.
We are in the game of using covert means against the Iranians.

We
could get nastier at that.”

“We Know Where Your Kids Live” John Bolton threatened head of chemical weapons commission as part of effort launch war against Iraq https://theintercept.com/2018/03/29/john-bolton-trump-bush-bustani-kids-opcw/ …

1,664

6:10 AM – Apr 2, 2018

“We Know Where Your Kids Live”: How John Bolton Once Threatened an International Official

“John Bolton is a bully,” said José Bustani, a retired Brazilian diplomat. “I don’t know how people can work for him.”

theintercept.com

So
these are ideas that have been in circulation for many years. That
gun is loaded and ready to fire.

Bolton
trussed up his 2010 confession using an example that most people
would agree with: that it was reasonable for the Allied forces
to deliberately
deceive the Nazis about
the nature of the D-Day invasion. But we know John Bolton better than
that by now.

This PNAC
director and
architect of the Iraq war once
threatened to murder a foreign official’s children because
his successful diplomatic efforts were putting a damper on the
manufacturing of consent for the Iraq invasion. He wasn’t defending
the use of deception in crucial military options used to halt tyrants
trying to take over the world, he was defending the use of deception
in the senseless wars of aggression that he has built his political
career on advancing.

Take
everything you hear about Iran with a planet-sized grain of salt,
dear reader, and everything you hear about Venezuela too while we’re
on the subject. There are skillful manipulators who are hell bent on
toppling the governments of those nations, and they have absolutely
no problem whatsoever with deceiving you in order to facilitate that.
And they don’t believe the rules apply to them.

Support
Caitlin’s work on Patreon or Paypal.

Opinion
by Caitlin
Johnstone /
Republished with permission / Medium / Report
a typo