Oekraïne crisis: Bill Clinton één van de aanstichters van de crisis

Bill Clinton was in feite een slappe president die geen verweer had tegen het Pentagon, noch de CIA. Daardoor was het mogelijk dat de NAVO zich kon uitbreiden naar het oosten, ofwel naar de grens met Rusland, dit tegen meerdere afspraken die men in 1990 en 1991 maakte met de voormalige Sovjet-Unie…. Hierbij moet nog worden opgemerkt dat ook de rechtse vleugel van de Democratische partij Clinton onder controle had en ook die vleugel wilde verdere uitbreiding van de NAVO….

Bij die afspraak stelde de Sovjet-Unie de eerdere westelijke staten niet te zullen aanvallen of weer in te lijven, dat zet nog eens extra vraagtekens bij de dooddoener van NAVO topgraaier Stoltenberg dat landen het recht hebben om zich aan te sluiten bij de NAVO, terwijl de VS de weg daartoe tegen de afspraken in had vrijgemaakt al onder oorlogsmisdadiger Clinton…… 

In het volgende artikel geschreven door Melvin Goodman en gepubliceerd op CounterPunch, legt de schrijver nog eens uit welke afspraken werden gemaakt met de Sovjet-Unie in 1990, waar in 1991 met voormalig president van de Sovjet-Unie Gorbatsjov nog eens uitdrukkelijk werd afgesproken dat de NAVO zich niet naar het oosten zou uitbreiden….. (vreemd genoeg noemt Goodman de afspraak met Gorbatsjov niet)

Ongelofelijk hoe men in het westen Rusland demoniseert als een agressieve oorlogszuchtige natie, terwijl die twijfelachtige eer volledig toekomt aan de VS (en haar NAVO partners), dat deze eeuw officieel 4 illegale oorlogen is begonnen ‘gelegitimeerd’ op basis van leugens en daarnaast oorlog heeft gevoerd en nog voert in Afrika, verder voert de CIA o.a. af en aan geheime operaties uit in Latijns Amerika, waarbij ook grote aantallen mensen werden en worden vermoord…… (met een paar fikse mislukkingen in Venezuela) Bij die grootschalige VS terreur kwamen tot nu toe ruim meer dan 5 miljoen mensen om het leven, ofwel die werden door VS en NAVO troepen vermoord!!! (die meer dan 5 miljoen moorden zijn inclusief de vele duizenden doden die de VS vermoordde met drones, waarmee men verdachten wilde uitschakelen [wat internationaal wordt gezien als een zware misdaad], daarbij was meer dan 90% van de slachtoffers niet eens verdacht!!)……Niet vreemd dan ook dat deze VS terreur enorme stromen vluchtelingen opgang hebben gebracht en daarnaast terreur hebben gekweekt op de straten van de EU…..

De westerse reguliere media en politiek hebben ronduit propaganda gemaakt voor de VS oorlogen, terwijl men nu Russische media beschuldigt van het brengen van propaganda…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Men maakt zich druk om Russische militairen aan de grens met Oekraïne, terwijl de VS een raketschild voor de deur van Rusland heeft geïnstalleerd (in Polen en Roemenië) en datzelfde land met haar NAVO-partners bijna het jaarrond militaire oefeningen houden langs de westgrens en de territoriale wateren met resp. van Rusland…… Oefeningen o.a. gericht op het binnenvallen van Russisch grondgebied…… Voorts bevinden zich troepen van meerdere NAVO-lidstaten in Oekraïne en heeft de VS dat land afgeladen met wapens…..

Onder het artikel van CounterPunch nog een bericht van de WDR 5 site, waar op deze zender vanmiddag weer fiks werd getapt uit het anti-Russische propaganda vat…….

(On
the top right hand side of this page you can choose for a translation
in the language of your choice, first choose ‘Engels’ [English] so
you can recognise your own language [the Google translation is first
in Dutch, a language most people don’t understand, while on the other
hand most people recognise there language translated in English]
, You can do the same with the German text)

(als
je het Engels en/of Duits niet machtig bent, kopieer dan de Engelse of Duitse tekst en plak
die in
deze
vertaalapp
,
de app werkt snel en de vertaling is van een redelijk goede
kwaliteit
)

 

 

 

Bill Clinton’s Role in the Crisis Over Ukraine

Photograph Source: Matt Johnson – CC BY 2.0

The militarization of American foreign policy has evolved over the
past thirty years. Ironically, this took place in the wake of the
dissolution of the Soviet Union, which should have led to reassessing
U.S. national security policy and defense spending.  Democratic
presidents have played a major role in this militarization because they
are unwilling to challenge the Pentagon and the defense industry.

Bill Clinton was initially responsible for the militarization.  He
abolished the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and began the
expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.  Barack Obama
believed that war in Afghanistan was a “good war,” and reappointed
Robert Gates as secretary of defense to appease the uniformed military. 
President Joe Biden even appointed a retired four-star general to the
position of secretary of defense, and has given diplomacy a back seat in
the twin struggles with Russia and China.  The postwar presidents
understood the need to divide Moscow and Beijing, but Biden has taken
actions that have inspired Russia and China to grow closer.

But it all started with Clinton, whose relations with the Pentagon
were tenuous from the outset.  Clinton came into office with a
reputation for manipulating the draft laws in 1969 to avoid service in
Vietnam.  Clinton, moreover, alienated the military shortly after his
inauguration when he suggested that he would allow homosexuals to serve
openly in the military.  Of course, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and
William Cohen avoided Vietnam, but Republicans typically get a pass from
the Pentagon and the press when avoiding service. Former senator John
Kerry was a Vietnam War hero, but his ultimate criticism of the war was
highlighted by the mainstream media and his Republican opposition.

Clinton bowed to military pressure time and time again on numerous
national security issues. His capitulations weakened or abandoned
agreements dealing with the International Criminal Court; a ban on
landmines; the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty; and the Chemical Warfare
Convention. Clinton bowed to the Democratic Party’s right wing in
naming James Woolsey as director of the Central Intelligence Agency. When Woolsey, a Cold Warrior, wore out his welcome on the Hill, he was
forced to resign. Clinton then named an Air Force general to succeed
Woolsey; the general was forced to withdraw his nomination, but this
earned no mention in Clinton’s autobiography.  Similarly, Clinton’s book
makes no mention of his efforts to name Admiral Bobby Inman, another
Cold Warrior, as secretary of defense.  Clinton’s CIA directors, John
Deutch and George Tenet, contributed to the decline of the CIA.

The Pentagon had so little respect for Clinton that, in 1994, it did
not respond to the efforts of the White House to create military options
for stopping the genocide in Rwanda or for countering al Qaeda in
Afghanistan.  Conversely, Clinton ordered the bombing of a
pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan in 1998 in the wake of the
bombings of the U.S. embassies on the Horn of Africa.  The White House
argued the plant was producing lethal chemicals; no, it was producing
aspirin for all of Africa and this was known to the intelligence
community. Clinton’s White House and the Pentagon ignored the warnings
of the Department of State and the CIA to avoid using Yemen as a
refueling stop for U.S. warships because of the threat of terrorism.  As
a result, the U.S.S. Cole was targeted in 2000 with a loss of 17 U.S. sailors.

We are still dealing with the results of Clinton’s ill-informed
decision making, particularly with regard to the current crisis with
Russia over Ukraine.  Clinton’s decision to expand NATO virtually
ensured that there would be little progress in developing a strategic
approach toward Russia.  The liberated states of East Europe, in the
wake of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, wanted to be anchored to
the West, but the proper vehicle for such an arrangement was the
European Union, not NATO.  Indeed, the greatest strategic failure of the
Clinton administration was its marginalization of Russia rather than
anchoring Russia to the West, as suggested by the late George Kennan in
his strategy of containment.

The expansion of NATO marked a betrayal of President George H.W. Bush
and Secretary of State James A. Baker III’s commitment in 1990 to not
“leapfrog” East Germany if the Soviets removed their 380,000 troops from
the East.  The continuing flirtation of membership for both Ukraine and
Georgia, which started in 2008, has caused Russia anxieties over the
changing European balance.  Expanding NATO was a gratuitous provocation,
which belies U.S. accusations from high-level officials that the crisis
over Ukraine is a “manufactured” one by Russian President Vladimir
Putin.  In January 1990, the West German foreign minister confirmed that
there would not be an “expansion of NATO territory to the east” in the
wake of the Soviet military withdrawal.  In my interviews with Baker and
Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze in 1994, Baker acknowledged (and
Shevardnadze confirmed) that he told the former foreign minister the
United States would not “leapfrog” over a reunified Germany to move
closer to the borders of the Soviet Union.  There are reports that Baker
was willing to put this commitment in writing, but that national
security adviser Brent Scowcroft convinced the president not to do so.

The sad fact is that the international calculus had nothing to do
with Clinton’s decision to expand NATO.  He was concerned that his
Republican opponent in1996, the late Robert Dole, was going to use the
failure to expand NATO in the campaign for the presidency.  Clinton, a
masterful domestic politician, moved to take the NATO issue off the
table by endorsing expansion.  This played well domestically among East
European communities in key states such as Michigan and Wisconsin. 
George W. Bush worsened the strategic situation by recruiting former
Soviet republics, the three Baltic states, for NATO and deploying a
regional missile defense in Poland and Romania.

Overall, the Clinton presidency weakened the national security
process by compromising the balance between the key instruments of
foreign policy, ending the once central role of the Department of
State.  The end to the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and the
United State Information Service as well as the weakening of the Agency
for International Development deemphasized the civilian agencies in the
formation and conceptualization of U.S. foreign policy.  The Pentagon
was the major winner in this rebalancing; similarly, the Pentagon’s
control over the intelligence community was bolstered.  To paraphrase
Mark Twain, when the only tool in the toolbox is a hammer, then all of
our problems will look like nails.

Melvin A. Goodman is a senior fellow at the Center for
International Policy and a professor of government at Johns Hopkins
University.  A former CIA analyst, Goodman is the author of Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA and National Insecurity: The Cost of American Militarism. and A Whistleblower at the CIA. His
most recent books are “American Carnage: The Wars of Donald Trump”
(Opus Publishing, 2019) and “Containing the National Security
State” (Opus Publishing, 2021). 
Goodman is the national security columnist for counterpunch.org.

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

Hier nog de tekst bij het Tagesgespräch op WDR 5, waar een zogenaamde vrije journalist de luisteraar trakteert op een onversneden portie Rusland haat…..:

Kalt, aber noch kein Krieg – Wer muss sich bewegen?

Krise zwischen der Ukraine und Russland: Annalena Baerbock und Sergei Lavrov Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and German Foreign Minister
Annalena Baerbock | Pooled photo by Maxim Shemetov/ AFP via Getty Images 

Die
Lage zwischen Russland und der Ukraine bleibt angespannt.
Außenministerin Baerbock will vermitteln. Haben Sie Sorge vor einer
Eskalation? Und was kann jetzt helfen? Diskutieren Sie mit im WDR 5
Tagesgespräch!

Es ist eine schwierige Bewährungsprobe für
Annalena Baerbock: Nach Gesprächen mit der Ukraine ging es gestern
(18.01.22) zum Antrittsbesuch nach Moskau. Auf der gemeinsamen
Pressekonferenz sprach Baerbock von “fundamentalen
Meinungsverschiedenheiten”, der russische Außenminister Lawrow erinnerte
an die Sicherheitsinteressen Russlands. Die Ukraine blickt nach Westen
und zur NATO. Dem will Moskau einen Riegel vorschieben und erwartet
Garantien des Westens, dass die NATO die Ukraine nicht aufnimmt. Die
Ukraine sei frei in ihrer Wahl, so die Antwort. Viel gegenseitiges
Verständnis für die unterschiedlichen Perspektiven ist derzeit nicht
erkennbar.

Der Handlungsdruck ist hoch: Russland hat seit
Ende Dezember Militär an der ukrainischen Grenze stationiert,
mittlerweile sollen rund 100.000 Soldaten einsatzbereit sein. Während
die USA und Großbritannien die Ukraine mit Defensivwaffen beliefern,
schlägt die Ampel-Regierung deren Forderung nach Aufrüstung bislang aus –
Baerbock will stattdessen auf Diplomatie setzen. Die Sorge vor einer
Eskalation des Konflikts wächst: Laut der OSZE (Organisation für
Sicherheit und Zusammenarbeit in Europa) sei die Kriegsgefahr so groß
wie seit 30 Jahren nicht mehr.

Haben Sie die Befürchtung, dass es zu einem Krieg
zwischen Russland und der Ukraine kommt? Ist es klüger nachzugeben und
Russland ein Zugeständnis zu machen? Welche Erwartungen haben Sie an
Außenministerin Baerbock und Deutschland? Kann diplomatisches Geschick
zur Deeskalation beitragen? Oder könnte militärische Abschreckung den
Konflikt entschärfen – wenn alle viel zu verlieren haben, halten sich
vielleicht alle zurück?

Rufen Sie uns während der Sendung an (WDR 5 Hotline 0800 5678 555).

Gast: Gemma Pörzgen, freie Journalistin mit Schwerpunkt Osteuropa (vrije journalist? Een regelrechte lobbyist voor het buitenland beleid van de VS, de NAVO en de westerse wapenindustrie in het groot!!)

Redaktion: Willi Schlichting und Jessica Eisermann

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

Zie ook: ‘Hack van Oekraïense overheid door landgenoten, of nee toch Rusland en geheime diensten VS waarschuwen voor Russische false flag operatie

NAVO uitbreiding in Oost-Europa is bewezen tegen gesloten overeenkomst met Rusland…….

Stoltenberg (NAVO) speelt de vermoorde onschuld en doet of hij serieus wil overleggen met Rusland

NAVO is ‘vredesorganisatie’ als je ‘secretaris-generaal’ Jens Stoltenberg moet geloven: ‘geen kernraketten in Europa’

Aanslag
op Navalny wekt (zonder bewijs) woede in westen, terwijl door Trump
toegegeven moorden stilte opleveren in datzelfde westen

(zie de links in dat bericht naar meer berichten over het Navalny
sprookje >> een blootstelling aan novitsjok is ten allen tijde
zonder meer dodelijk!!!)

Tony Blinken heeft de Oekraïense president Zelensky de wacht aangezegd: zijn land is officieel een VS kolonie

Putin gaf het westen een memorabele les geopolitiek

De VS zet zichzelf wat betreft Rusland, China en Iran geopolitiek schaakmat‘ 

VS
eist dat Rusland haar troepen terugtrekt van de Oekraïense grens en
volgens inlichtingenbron: politiek het grootste gevaar voor burgers
VS……..
‘ En dan de volgende (!!!):

VS generaal steunt een preventieve aanval met kernwapens

Strijd opgelaaid in Oost-Oekraïne tussen het leger en ‘door Rusland gesteunde rebellen’, aldus BBC World Service

Kernwapens in Europa: Rode Kruis >> Nederland moet het VN kernwapenverbod tekenen

Franse luchtmacht oefent voor WOIII op nucleaire lange-afstands bombardementen……….

Stoltenberg (NAVO zetbaas) liegt spijkerhard aangaande overleg INF-verdrag met Rusland

Star Wars 2.0: Trump wil een ‘raketafweersysteem’ in de ruimte

Jens
Stoltenberg (NAVO zetbaas): de NAVO bombardeerde Servië om het volk te
kunnen redden, of Servië nu maar even NAVO lid wil worden……..
‘ 

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

Oekraïne kondigt staat van beleg af vanwege ‘Russische agressie’ in de Zee van Azov

Stoltenberg (topgraaier NAVO) wil nog meer kernraketten in Europa…….

VS dreigt INF verdrag op de zeggen >> Trump verwijt de Russische ketel dat die nucleair zwart ziet

Oekraïne
het toneel van grootschalige luchtmachtoefeningen met VS en NAVO, naast
een enorme militaire VS/NAVO oefening in Noorwegen


VS en Japan stoken samen de ‘oorlogsboel’ op over de Oost-Chinese Zee

Pentagon Report Points To US Preparations For Total War

VS heeft Rusland al 3 keer met oorlog gedreigd, de laatste 2 keer in de afgelopen 1,5 week……

Zelenski (president Oekraïne) ingepakt door neonazi’s en beloften aan EU gedaan door Porosjenko

Oekraïne: opnieuw neonazi protesten op Maidanplein, vanwege Rusland vriendelijk handelen door president Zelensky

De Krim het echte verhaal: geen annexatie maar de vrijwillige aansluiting bij Rusland, zelfs Oekraïners stemden voor

Snowden vindt het ongelofelijk dat de media VS politici niet aanspreken op totaal verschillende reacties n.a.v. ‘klokkenluiden’

Joe Biden heeft al lang toegegeven dat hij Oekraïne onder druk zette een openbaar aanklager te ontslaan die zijn zoon vervolgde

Koning Willem Alexander vraagt Rusland om medewerking bij onderzoek naar rampvlucht MH17‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht naar meer informatie over rampvlucht MH17)

MH17:
JIT haalt zelfs de afscheiding van Oost-Oekraïne aan in de zoveelste
mislukte poging de schuld in de schoenen van Rusland te schuiven

Oekraïne kondigt staat van beleg af vanwege ‘Russische agressie’ in de Zee van Azov

————————————–

Wat hacken en propaganda betreft zie ook:VS
ministerie van defensie, lees: ministerie van (oorlog en) terreur:
wordt verdedigd door het westen, terwijl men Rusland en China
demoniseert

Verkiezingen Nicaragua: één grote demonisering in de westerse media, vergelijk dat eens met verkiezingen in de VS

VS propagandamachine onder de loep genomen door schrijver Nick Schou

Westerse oorlogshitserij tegen China over Taiwan: in de VS is 52% van de bevolking voor oorlog….

Elaine Luria (VS Huis van Afgevaardigden) wil Biden ‘carte blanche’ geven voor oorlog tegen China‘ (ook het militaire pact AUKUS komt aan bod in dit bericht)

Brits marineschip provoceert China in de Straat van Taiwan: op weg naar Wereldoorlog III‘ (o.a. over AUKUS)

via Zuma Press

China: Ausländische Schiffe müssen sich in chinesischen Gewässern registrieren‘ 

Australië laat zich chanteren door de VS: niet langer ‘het beest China’ voeren‘ (o.a. over Aukus)

Veronderstel
dat er een terreurgroep zou zijn die in bezit was van: drones,
kruisraketten, kernkoppen, straaljagers, vliegdekschepen en bases over
de hele wereld

Militaire bases VS goed voor grote ‘defensie uitgaven’ en een garantie voor komende oorlogsvoering (o.a. over Aukus)

MIVD en media schoten 4 Russische bokken met de claim van spionage op de OPCW….

Nederland, Groot-Brittannië en VS schieten ‘4 geheime Russische spionage bokken’

Duitsland doet mee in het koor van de wolven: Russische cyberterreur!

———————————-

Voor meer terreur van de VS zie:CIA sinds oprichting: murder incorporated: een verdediging gegeven door ‘journalist’ Annie Jacobson

VS vermoordde meer dan 20 miljoen mensen sinds het einde van WOII……..‘ Tot het jaar 2000, deze eeuw zijn daar al meer dan 5 miljoen dodelijke slachtoffers aan toegevoegd….. Zie wat dat betreft ook:

De illegale oorlogen van de VS deze eeuw hebben niet 2,5 miljoen levens gekost, maar minstens 5 miljoen‘ en zie wat dat betreft ook: 

VS maakte 10 keer meer slachtoffers, dan de reguliere media rapporteerden……..‘ In de ‘oorlog tegen terreur’ die men beter had kunnen noemen: illegale oorlogen van de VS met grootschalige terreur…..

CIA 70 jaar: 70 jaar moorden, martelen, coups plegen, nazi’s beschermen, media manipulatie enz. enz………

CIA en 70 jaar desinformatie in Europese opiniebladen…………

VS buitenlandbeleid sinds WOII: een lange lijst van staatsgrepen en oorlogen……….

‘VS ‘ministerie van propaganda’ had supervisie over meer dan 800 films en minstens duizend tv series……..

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

VS
en GB brengen propaganda die moet verdoezelen wat er echt gebeurt in
Syrië…….. Door VS gebombardeerde ‘gifgasfabriek’ niet bestaand….

George W. Bush noemt terugtrekking van troepen uit Afghanistan een vergissing…..

Bij de strekking van de kop op dit bericht zou ik me normaal gesproken kapotlachen, echter deze zaak is te ernstig en te triest om te lachen….. Bush die normaal gesproken nooit een interview geeft, heeft een uitzondering gemaakt voor een Duitse prutser die zich als journalist verkoopt….. Logisch dat Bush geen interviews geeft aan journalisten die hem het vuur aan de schenen zouden kunnen leggen, immers daar heeft dit kwaadaardige leeghoofd geen verweer tegen…. 

Bush probeert op alle mogelijke manieren zijn presidentschap als een succes te doen voorkomen, daarvoor heeft hij zelfs een eigen bibliotheek laten bouwen (alweer: het is dat het zo triest is….) en een pruts ‘journalist’ is natuurlijk een uitgelezen kans om die pogingen meer houvast te geven…

Niet vreemd dan ook dat Bush de terugtrekking van troepen uit Afghanistan een vergissing noemt…. Een vergissing? Velen stellen dat de illegale oorlogen van de VS tegen Afghanistan en Irak een vergissing waren en dat ook nog eens gebaseerd op grove leugens, oorlogen die een paar miljoen mensen het leven hebben gekost, in Irak gaat het zelfs om meer dan 2 miljoen door de VS vermoordde mensen: kinderen, ouden van dagen, vrouwen en mannen….. (al hebben andere NAVO-lidstaten als Nederland meegewerkt aan de vreselijke oorlogsmisdaden in dat land….) Echter het gaat bij die illegale oorlogen, evenals die van Obama tegen Libië en Syrië niet om een ‘vergissing’, maar om een weloverwogen plan om macht uit te kunnen oefenen in het Midden-Oosten en Noord-Afrika, waarbij de VS tevens de beschikking kreeg over enorme voorraden aan olie en gas, voorts zijn landen als Irak, Syrië en Afghanistan van strategisch belang, zeker als de VS bijvoorbeeld een oorlog wil beginnen tegen Iran…. Voorts is Afghanistan van strategisch belang als het gaat om Rusland, echter de Taliban was figuurlijk een paar maten te groot voor de VS, zo heeft men na 20 jaar wel moeten concluderen….. In feite is de oorlog tegen Afghanistan een Vietnam oorlog in herhaling geworden, waarvoor de VS uit en te na voor werd gewaarschuwd alvorens deze terreurstaat dat land binnenviel….

Naast dit alles moet niet vergeten worden dat Bush in feite een marionet was voor de haviken in het Witte Huis: figuren als Dick Cheney en Donald Rumsfeld hadden al plannen voor Afghanistan en Irak voordat Bush tot president werd verkozen…….

Bush verkondigt nog steeds dat de ingreep van de VS in Afghanistan goed was voor het land en dat het leven veel beter was dan onder de Taliban, waarbij deze hufter voor het gemak vergeet hoe de ‘warlords’ dat land omtoverden tot de grootste heroïne leverancier van de wereld, waarbij deze warlords al evenzo terreur uitoefenden op de bevolking….. (toen de VS Afghanistan binnenviel had de Taliban de papaverteelt teruggebracht tot een niet eerder vertoond minimum, terwijl dit land nu weer de allergrootste is op dat gebied, dankzij de hulp van de VS en haar NAVO-partners…….)

Belachelijk ook dat Bush durft te zeggen dat het land zo ten goede is veranderd nadat de VS het land binnenviel, immers het zijn ronduit misdadigers die de regering van Afghanistan vormen en afgeleiden van de eerder genoemde warlords, voorts zijn ze zo corrupt als de pest…..

Bush durft zelfs te liegen dat hij de oorlog tegen Afghanistan niet is begonnen vanwege de Taliban die Al Qaida onderdak zou hebben geboden, maar om jongens en meisjes te emanciperen……. De schoft durfde verder op te merken dat hij bang is dat Afghaanse vrouwen en meisjes ongelofelijk zullen lijden (onder de Taliban), terwijl de naam Bush gelijk staat aan ongelofelijk lijden van Afghaanse meisjes, jongens, vrouwen, mannen en ouden van dagen….. 

Men durft te liegen dat er 100.000 Afghanen zijn omgekomen door de illegale oorlog van de VS, echter dat zijn er zeker 500.000 dit daar men ten eerste het cijfer zo laag mogelijk wil houden en ten tweede geen rekening houdt met het feit dat doden binnen 24 uur moeten worden begraven, waarbij de VS en de andere NAVO troepen geen toegang hadden tot een wisselend aantal gebieden….. Aan VS kant zijn er 2.500 militairen omgekomen in die illegale oorlog en aan Nederlandse kant 25, mensen die geheel voor niets zijn gestorven…..

Me dunkt dat de oorlogsmisdaden begaan in Afghanistan een onderzoek van het Internationaal Strafhof (ICC) meer dan waard zijn, waarbij dit hof niet alleen degenen moet vervolgen die daadwerkelijk oorlogsmisdaden hebben begaan, maar zeker ook de politiek verantwoordelijken, daar zij door hun rol ook oorlogsmisdadigers zijn, immers zonder hun goedkeuring waren deze misdaden niet begaan!! Onder het te onderzoeken geteisem in de VS: Bush, uiteraard de nummer één oorlogsmisdadiger, plus de ooorlogshitsers Rumsfeld (jammer gernoeg al overleden) en Cheney, dan nog de oorlogsmisdadigers in ons land: CDA opperschoften: Balkenende, de Hoop Scheffer, Hillen, Bot, Verhagen, en Bijleveld; VVD ploerten: van Aartsen, de Grave, Rosenthal, Rutte, Hennis-Plasschaert, Blok, Kamp, Korthals, Zijlstra en Dijkhoff; PvdA hufters Bos, Timmermans en Koenders; hare D66 kwaadaardigheid Kaag en tot slot ChristenUnie sukkel Middelkoop….. (Hennis-Plasschart is als beloning voor de onder haar ministerschap begane oorlogsmisdaden, door NB de VN benoemd als speciale gezant voor Irak, een grove belediging voor het volk van Irak…..)

Vergeet na dit alles niet dat de oorlogen tegen Afghanistan en Irak, onderdeel van de War on Terror, juist terreur hebben gekweekt op de straten van Europa….

Het volgende artikel geschreven door Andrew Mitrovica werd gepubliceerd op Information Clearing House. Andrew maakt zich in zijn schrijven flink pissig op Bush en het is het lezen meer dan waard: 

George W. Bush Should Shut Up and Go Away

Bush is a mass murderer. He should be
sharing a bunk bed with Ratko Mladic at The
Hague, not giving interviews on Afghanistan
in Maine.

By Andrew Mitrovica


By now,
George W
Bush should have completed
volumes one and two of his prison letters.

But, as we know, the world is not a just
place. So, like all the other American
presidents who have avoided the dock despite
the crimes they have committed at home and
abroad, the former US president remains a
free, and, indeed, carefree, man.

I suspect that Bush is happy, too, biding
his time during his “golden years” painting
what can charitably be described as globby,
deformed “portraits” and tending to the
tangled bush on his Texas estate.

“With the eager help of
grovelling, amnesiac television hosts, Bush
has mounted a muted, yet determined campaign
to rehabilitate his foul reputation.”

It is inconceivable to me, though, that a
once immensely powerful man who is almost
singularly responsible for two calamitous
wars-of-choice which have caused such
immeasurable harm and suffering to so many
innocents, in so many places, could ever
experience a genuine moment of stillness,
let alone happiness.

I wonder, as well, if Bush ever pauses
from his painting and gardening to consider
the appalling measure of his guilt or
shudders at the unfolding and halting scope
of the profound, disfiguring consequences of
his many and manifest crimes against decency
and humanity.

That may well be a largely rhetorical
question since one of the principal
qualifications of becoming president is the
necessity to kill, maim, and traumatise
other human beings in the murderous pursuit
of the ever malleable US “national
interest”.

So, Bush likely finds
considerable solace in the slimy evasion
that being president is often a thankless,
dirty job that requires, on occasion, the
occupant to order “hits” – big and small –
against America’s “enemies” just like a
mafia don, but with a much larger, more
well-equipped army, of course.

I have pondered these questions lately
about this banal, unrepentant killer and
torture-approving thug with a presidential
library because, rather than finally doing
the world a smidgen of service by
permanently shutting up in lieu of being
charged, Bush continues to believe,
incredibly, that his musings on war and
diplomacy have serious merit and should be
heeded.

Earlier this month, Bush was interviewed
at his palatial summer home in
Kennebunkport, Maine, by a German
broadcaster with apparently nothing better
to do with its time and resources.

The agreeable tête-à-tête was billed as a
“rare” departure of form for Bush, who
reportedly avoids sit-down interviews with
journalists.

Gee, I wonder why?

Apart from briefly prying Bush away from
his juvenile tinkering with paint on a
canvas and taming his unruly hedges, an
interview conducted by an intrepid reporter
might cause the stammering, reclusive
ex-president a little discomfort and serve
as a mild, belated comeuppance of sorts.

Bush could, for once, have
been challenged to account finally for the
litany of lies he concocted and told to
start wars that he and his posse of criminal
“advisers” in slick suits and designer
outfits convinced themselves would be cheap,
easy and quick.

Two decades later, the cruel, lethal
folly of Bush’s cocky, catastrophic
delusions and fabrications is plain:
millions dead and scarred in body, mind and
spirit, countless other lives ruined or left
adrift in refugee camps where disease, want
and hopelessness are rampant, countries
engulfed by endless uncertainty, violence
and sectarianism and a patient, resurgent
Taliban poised to reimpose its malignant
dominion over Afghanistan.

Bush could also have been pressed about
his role in engineering an international
abduction racket – known as “renditions” –
that permitted America’s state-sanctioned
hoodlums to kidnap mostly Muslim men and
dump them into secret dungeons in Iraq and
beyond where they were bound, interrogated,
humiliated, electrocuted, attacked by dogs,
sexually assaulted, water-boarded and,
ultimately, murdered.

None of that appears to have happened.
Instead, Bush was given unfettered licence
to object to the withdrawal of the remaining
US and NATO troops from Afghanistan.

“The consequences are going to be
unbelievably bad,” Bush said, without, I
imagine, even a hint of irony.

That this callous cretin would suggest
anywhere, at any time, for any reason, that
the “consequences” of another president’s
actions “are going to be unbelievably bad”
for Afghanistan is blatant proof of Bush’s
genetically programmed stupidity and
obscene, near nauseating hubris.

Then, Bush proceeded to
demonstrate that he is damaged in ways that
only a psychologist could possibly decipher
and is incapable of introspection or remorse
for the horror he has wrought on so many
people, in so many places because of his
orders as commander-in-chief.

First, he told his German guests that the
Afghan withdrawal was a mistake.

Given his atrocious geopolitical record,
Bush should be banned from ever uttering,
under any circumstances and in any context,
the word: “mistake”.

Still, to define how Bush and equally
culpable company went about methodically
defacing Iraq and Afghanistan as “mistakes”
would, itself, be a mistake.

The injuries and atrocities Iraqis and
Afghans have endured in the long, bitter
aftermath of Bush’s decision to invade
cannot be diminished or dismissed simply as
errors.

They were and remain the inhumane
corollaries of the sinister, calculated
choices made by an inept president who was
convinced that it was his and America’s
destiny to “liberate” two distant lands for
the same evangelical reasons.

Second, remarkably, Bush
took implicit credit – amid all the death
and destruction the American-led invasion
has visited on Afghans – for brutally
refashioning Afghan society as a
recuperative antidote to the Taliban’s
brutality.

“It’s unbelievable how that society
changed from the brutality of the Taliban,”
Bush said.

No, what is unbelievable, is Bush’s
lunatic idea that the US military occupation
of Iraq and Afghanistan had any redeeming or
salutary impact on the fates of both
nations.

Finally, and so cynically, Bush attempted
to rewrite his incriminating history by
implying that he unleashed American forces
and drones on Afghanistan not to rout the
Taliban or punish it for harbouring
al-Qaeda, but to emancipate women and girls.

“All of a sudden – sadly – I’m afraid
Afghan women and girls are going to suffer
unspeakable harm,” Bush said from the
comfort of his picture-postcard oasis.

The name George W Bush is synonymous with
the suffering and unspeakable harm girls,
boys, women and men in Iraq and Afghanistan
have braved for decades.

With the eager help of
grovelling, amnesiac television hosts, Bush
has mounted a muted, yet determined campaign
to rehabilitate his foul reputation. In its
place, a new, gracious, if slightly awkward
and endearing caricature of Bush has
emerged.

It is a sick mirage.

Bush is an unindicted mass murderer. He
ought to be sharing a bunk bed with Ratko
Mladic at The Hague. Failing that, he should
keep monastically quiet and go away.

As penance, it is the least this
intolerable piece of crud could do.

Andrew Mitrovica is an award-winning
investigative reporter and journalism instructor.

Click for

Spanish
,


German
,


Dutch
,


Danish
,


French
,
translation- Note-

Translation may take a moment to load.

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

Zie ook:Donald Rumsfelds dood: het systeem is er niet om ons te beschermen tegen zware misdadigers maar om deze te beschermen tegen ons

Daniel Hale: 4 jaar gevangenisstraf voor het uitvoeren van zijn burgerlijke plicht: ernstige misdaden aan de kaak stellen

De VS heeft de meest agressieve regering

Je zou de regering niet moeten vertrouwen, zeker niet als er commentaar wordt geleverd op de sociale media‘ (zie ook de links in dat bericht naar artikelen over censuur!!)

Hoe schunnig de machthebbers in de VS ook handelen, openbaring daarvan verandert niets

Afghanistan: terugtrekking troepen gaat ten koste van collaborerende tolken‘ Een bericht van 14 juli jl., intussen is het de VS die de meeste tolken en ander personeel opneemt dat voor het terreurleger van de VS werkte, dan wel hen een thuis in een ander land geeft; moet zeggen dat me dit meevalt.

VS
rechtszaak tegen klokkenluider Daniel Hale: ondanks het feit dat hij
ook volgens de Biden administratie niemand in gevaar bracht

Daniel Hale: een klokkenluider die 10 jaar gevangenisstraf wacht voor het openbaren van VS drone terreur

Hypocriete demonisering van Ilhan Omar, lid VS Huis van Afgevaardigden: ze zou de VS hebben vergeleken met Hamas

Coronacrisis: Australische militairen moeten de straten en huizen van o.a. moslims in Sydney controleren‘ (dezelfde militairen die ernstige oorlogsmisdaden begingen in Afghanistan…..)

Antony Blinken (VS minister BuZa) leest de wereld de les over persvrijheid terwijl zijn eigen regering deze zwaar geweld aandoet (!!!!)
De vervolging van Hale is ook belangrijk voor de persvrijheid in de VS,
niet voor niets laat de VS overheid journalisten en nieuwsredacties van
vooral de alternatieve media afluisteren en aftappen, dit om
klokkenluiders te kunnen oppakken voor ze uit de kerk kunnen klappen en
zo negatief nieuws betreffende de overheid te kunnen blokkeren………
Zie wat dat betreft ook:

‘Klokkenluidersbescherming’ in VS: Obama en Biden lieten journalisten en redacties afluisteren om klokkenluiders te pakken
(reken maar dat dit nog steeds gebeurt) (en zie de links in dat bericht
naar meer artikelen over o.a. Julian Assange en de fascistische
opperschoft Navalny) En zie:

Snowden vindt het ongelofelijk dat de media VS politici niet aanspreken op totaal verschillende reacties n.a.v. ‘klokkenluiden’‘ (!!!!) (9 oktober 2019) (en zie de links in dat bericht!!) En zie voorts:

Het verschil tussen totalitaire regimes en ‘vrije democratieën’ flinterdun en soms zelfs niet bestaand….

Een tweede oorlog tegen terreur ligt op de loer, terwijl een film de ‘oorlogsmisdaden’ van de eerste laat zien‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht!!)

Opiaten doden in de VS jaarlijks 10 keer zoveel mensen, dan terroristen in de afgelopen 20 jaar..!!! 

Seymour Hersh
(gelauwerd journalist) met onthullingen o.a. over de VS plannen met het
Midden-Oosten en de vergiftiging van de Skripals
‘ (waarin o.a. de voorspelling van Hersh in 2007 dat het bewapenen door de VS van extremistische soennieten zou leiden tot een oorlog in Syrië) 

9/11 werd mede georganiseerd door Israël

Irak oorlog: 16 jaar na 20 maart 2003 ontkent de perschef van Bush dat er is gelogen om Irak binnen te vallen…..‘ (!!!!)

Neil deGrasse Tyson, de populaire astrofisicus, is grootlobbyist van het militair-industrieel complex‘ (Rumsfeld was ook groot voorstander van VS dominantie in de ruimte en de militarisering daarvan….)

9/11: professor stelt dat WTC-gebouwen gecontroleerd zijn gesloopt, de bewijzen daarvoor zijn overweldigend‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht!!)

Veteranen waarschuwen Trump voor desastreuze gevolgen in geval van oorlog tegen Iran

CIA erkent dat Israël samen met Saoedi-Arabië ‘vecht tegen terreur’, die ze NB zelf hebben georganiseerd……..‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht!!) en zie:

VS belastingbetalers
geven per dag $ 250 miljoen uit aan ‘oorlog tegen terreur…..’ Daarom
moeten wij meer uitgeven aan defensie………..

Joe Darby de klokkenluider van Abu Ghraib moet afgeschermd leven……‘ (daar opperschoft Rumsfeld zijn woonplaats bekend maakte…..)

Irak: de illegale oorlog van de VS begon 18 jaar geleden

De
illegale oorlog van de VS tegen Irak begon op 20 maart 2003, ofwel sinds gisteren is het in Irak al 18 jaar lang oorlog…… Terwijl Buitenlandse Zaken met droge ogen durft te beweren dat het land veilig is om Iraakse vluchtelingen uit Nederland te deporteren naar hun moederland, hoewel dat intussen voor veel kinderen van die vluchtelingen Nederland is…… Nederland heeft de VS NB meegeholpen met de
voorbereiding van die illegale oorlog, Het kabinet ontkent dit na een ‘officieel onafhankelijk onderzoek'(ha! ha! ha!) te hebben laten uitvoeren, terwijl
iedereen kan weten dat een duikboot van Nederland in de maanden
voorafgaand aan die vreselijke oorlog voor de kust van Irak lag en
daarmee middels spionage gegevens verzamelde, met een paar figuren van waarschijnlijk de NSA aan boord die de boel coördineerden……..

Na de
illegale aanval op Irak, hebben CDA premier Balkenende en
CDA minister van BuZa, groothufter de Hoop Scheffer, bij de achterdeur van het Witte
Huis om 7.00 u. ‘s morgens de politieke steun van Nederland
toegezegd, later deed Nederland ook militair mee aan deze vreselijke
massamoord, waarmee deze 2 en de rest van het kabinet destijds moeten worden aangemerkt als oorlogsmisdadigers……… Als beloning mocht de Hoop Scheffer van de VS voor één
periode NAVO secretaris-generaal spelen, terwijl de VS wel altijd het
militaire opperbevel had en houdt over deze terreurorganisatie…….
De Hoop Scheffer zei een paar jaar geleden
(een moorddadige psychopaat waardig) dat hij nog steeds achter
deze op leugens gebaseerde illegale oorlog staat, ook al zijn in die illegale oorlog
meer dan 2 miljoen Irakezen vermoord……… (door het westen gaat deze oorlog door tot op de dag van vandaag >> zo meer daarover)

Drie vol-idioten bij elkaar, zie Balkenende en de Hoop Scheffer die als 2 boeren voor het eerst in de stad zijn en onzeker zijn bij een bezoek aan de burgemeester……

Velen
zullen zich nog het optreden herinneren van VS generaal Colin Powell
die in de VN met een groot aantal leugens en gefabriceerde ‘bewijzen’
probeerde deze illegale oorlog een legaal tintje te geven……..

Ondanks
dat VN Wapeninspecteur Hans Blix de studio’s van westerse tv kanalen bij
wijze van spreken plat liep om te vertellen dat Irak onmogelijk nog
voorraden massavernietigingswapens kon hebben, besloot het westen de
VS leugens te geloven en was de illegale oorlog tegen Irak een feit,
een oorlog die zoals gezegd zoveel mensenlevens heeft gekost……
Alle verantwoordelijken, waaronder Balkenende en de Hoop Scheffer
zouden strafrechtelijk moeten worden vervolgd door het Internationaal
Strafhof (ICC) en zouden voor het leven moeten worden opgesloten in
Scheveningen….. (moet je nagaan: oorlogsmisdadiger de Hoop Scheffer mag zelfs les geven aan de universiteit van Leiden…….)

Brasscheck TV komt andermaal met het verhaal wie er werkelijk achter de aanloop naar deze oorlog zat: de
NSA! Brasscheck bracht gisteren een bericht en video over dit onderwerp, daarin o.a. de herhaling van het feit dat de NSA (met medeweten van o.a. vicepresident Dick Cheney) de VN bespioneerde, ondanks dat dit al langer bekend is (in tegenstelling tot wat Brasscheck nu stelt), werd en wordt dit amper of niet gebracht door de reguliere massamedia….* Voorts wordt in de video gewezen op de hulp van de grote wapenfabrikanten, ofwel het militair-industrieel complex aan het werk ‘in optima forma…..’ (op zeker ook dat oorlogsmisdadiger George W. Bush, destijds president, op de hoogte moet zijn geweest van dit hele smerige spel……)

Hier een citaat uit een eerder bericht:

Katherine
Gun, destijds medewerker van een Britse inlichtingendienst, speelde
een hoofdrol in wat een vreselijke oorlog zou worden…..
Katherine
Gun ontving op 31 januari 2003 een mail van Frank Koza het hoofd van
een NSA afdeling. Hij vroeg hulp bij het afluisteren en chanteren van
de delegaties van 6 landen die tegen de oorlog in Irak waren en dat
in de VN volhielden. Het ging hier om Angola, Bulgarije, Kameroen,
Chili, Guinee en Pakistan. Gun was daardoor zo ongelofelijk pissig
dat ze de mail naar buiten bracht, echter pas op een later tijdstip
verscheen de mail in de pers…. Gun werd gearresteerd en na veel
gedoe zag de Britse regering uiteindelijk af van vervolging (een
vervolging die veel protest uitlokte, o.a. van Jesse Jackson, Daniel
Ellsberg van de Pentagon Papers en acteur en regisseur Sean Penn, die
haar een held noemde)…. De Britse regering stopte met de vervolging
daar men anders documenten had moeten vrijgeven die aantoonden dat
Gun volkomen gelijk had….. Vergelijk dit eens met hoe men nu omgaat
met Julian Assange, waar zelfs zijn collega’s zich tegen hem hebben
gekeerd en dat op uiterst valse gronden……

Vorig
jaar nam het Iraakse parlement met grote meerderheid een motie aan om
alle buitenlandse troepen de deur te wijzen, echter de VS en haar
terreurbondgenoten, waaronder Nederland, besloten dat dringende
verzoek op te rotten naast zich neer te leggen, sterker men ging (en
gaat nog) gewoon door met moorden in Irak, zo kwam ook de Iraanse
generaal Soleimani aan z’n eind, de generaal die met zoveel succes de
door de VS en Saoedi-Arabië gesteunde en georganiseerde terreurgroep ISIS heeft bestreden (voor die organisatie en steun van de VS zijn een groot aantal bewijzen >> o.a. in Wikileaks!!!)……

Alle
NAVO en VN troepen uit Irak en wel onmiddellijk!!! (Over die VN
troepen gesproken: de VN heeft de bewezen oorlogsmisdadiger in Irak, VVD
groothufter Hennis-Plasschaert, als VN gezant voor dat land
aangewezen…… Te cynisch voor woorden, wat een schande!!!)

The
NSA Lied Us Into Iraq

The
story you never heard

Produced by
RingofFireRadio.com

On this day in 2003 the US invaded
Iraq.

How did this “little” point get
lost in the NSA story?

The NSA’s JOB is to spy on the
communications of our enemies, not to listen to and record your phone
calls.

Here’s a case where they not only
got it massively wrong, it also looks like they remained silent while
their “evidence” was used to drive the US into a ruinous war.

Did they present false information
to the Bush criminals or did they merely sit back and do nothing when
that evidence was grossly misrepresented.

It hardly matters, does it.
Massively wrong in either case. (ja en met een massaal aantal moorden
tot gevolg…..)

Click here
to 
support
Brasscheck

(Brasscheck
heeft op 12 maart jl. Google en alle adverteerders bij het grofvuil
gezet, dus als je een ‘centje’ overhebt…….)

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

* De reguliere westerse media hebben de illegale oorlog tegen Irak uit en te na gesteund, zonder enig onderzoek naar de leugens te doen en Blix niet serieus nemend, gesteund door wat je niet anders dan als pure propaganda kan zien (met ‘fake news’ >> nepnieuws) en ondanks dat die media al lang weten dat deze oorlog was gebaseerd op leugens, werd daarover nooit een rectificatie geplaatst in die media…..

Zie ook: ‘Tony Blinken (VS minister van BuZa) liegt als hij zegt dat de VS alleen met toestemming van het volk geweld gebruikt in het buitenland

VS zegt uit zelfbescherming doelen in Syrië te hebben gebombardeerd……..‘ (alsof Syrië aan de VS grenst….)

De illegale oorlogen van de VS deze eeuw hebben niet 2,5 miljoen levens gekost, maar minstens 5 miljoen

10
jaar geleden werden de Irak oorlogs-logboeken van de VS vrijgegeven,
voor de oorlogsmisdaden daarin vermeld moeten niet de daders Bush en
Blair boeten, maar journalist Julian Assange
‘ 

Nederland stuurt troepen naar Irak, zeer tegen de zin van de bevolking

VS maakte 10 keer meer slachtoffers, dan de reguliere media rapporteerden……..

Libië, het echte motief voor de illegale oorlog tegen dat land, met in de hoofdrol Hillary Clinton…..‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht)

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

Soleimani: Ron Paul >> Trump en Pompeo hebben gelogen over de reden om deze Iraanse generaal te vermoorden‘ 

Iran geeft toe vlucht 752 per ongeluk te hebben neergehaald: het westen speculeert op expres neerhalen……‘ 

Tienduizenden
VS burgers demonstreerden en zullen demonstreren tegen de illegale
oorlog van de VS tegen Iran (za. en zo. ook in Nederland)

Rutte
3 heeft begrip voor de moord op Soleimani en hoopt dat de VS zich niet
terugtrekt uit Irak, een soeverein land >> westerse
propaganda……
‘ 

KLM vliegt na ‘risicoanalyse’ niet meer in luchtruim van Iran en Irak

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

Iran stelt terecht dat het VS leger een terroristische organisatie is

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

De VS gaf meer dan 1 miljoen dollar uit om protesten tegen Iraans bewind uit te buiten (en te organiseren)

Iraakse regering pissig over VS beschuldiging dat Iraanse bewind corrupt is

US Views Iran’s Qassem Soleimani as “Equivalent” to ISIS Leader

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

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

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


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


Protesten Iran opgezet door de VS en Israël


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

US Empire Is Running The Same Script With Iran That It Ran With Libya, Syria

Nikki Haley (VS ambassadeur in de VN) bedreigt sjiitisch Iran met militair ingrijpen……

VS liegt schaamteloos om het westen verder op te zetten tegen Iran……..

Aanval in Irak op ‘door Iran gesteunde militie’: 25 uh… 30 doden‘  

VS gaat door met destabiliseren Irak: 5 aanvallen, waarvan één op een Iraakse militaire basis

Joe Biden mede verantwoordelijk voor de oorlog tegen Irak in 2003 en verdere demonisering van Rusland

Defensie wist dat bestoken van bommenfabriek in Hawija een groot aantal slachtoffers zou maken

Bellincat wordt betaald door de VS overheid ha! ha! ha! ha!

Bernard Hammelburg rijp voor oorlogshitsclub Atlantic Council: Al Qaida opereert vanuit Iran

Na massamoord in Hawija: Nederlands fregat naar Golf van Hormuz

Joost Vullings (Radio1 ‘politiek verslaggever’) maakt grap over de rug van door Nederland ‘gedode’ Irakezen

Defensie wist dat bestoken van bommenfabriek in Hawija een groot aantal slachtoffers zou maken 

Ank
Bijleveld (CDA minister Defensie) komt met ‘excuus’ voor ‘wir haben es
nicht gewusst’ >> burgerslachtoffers F16 bombardement
 

Bijleveld (CDA minister) en Hennis-Plasschaert (ex-minister VVD): de burgerdoden door Nederland gemaakt in een illegale oorlog

Rutte ‘wist in 2015 niets over burgerdoden in Irak’
(een minister-president zonder geheugen aan belangrijke politieke
zaken, hoe is het mogelijk?? Hoe durft men deze flapdrol in de reguliere media nog
een geweldig premier te noemen???)


Middendorp: onze F16’s zijn in actie gekomen en er zijn geen……….. burgerslachtoffers gevallen!!

Irak, tussen 1 januari 2014 en 31 oktober 2015 door geweld 55.047 doden…

Irak gevangen door VS agressie richting Iran en daarnaast een opstand in eigen land

Meer bewijs voor VS betrokkenheid bij transport en bevrijding van IS leden

Al Qaida Jemen krijgt VS wapens van Saoedi-Arabië

Verenigde Arabische Emiraten bewapenen ISIS en Al Qaida‘ (in Jemen)

ISIL weapons traced to US and Saudi Arabia 


VS heeft Saoedische terreurcoalitie getraind hoe Jemen te bombarderen 

 

Beste bezoeker, dit was het voor vandaag, morgen meer berichten. Maak er als het enigszins mogelijk is een mooie dag van. 

Victoria Nuland, waarschijnlijk nieuwe VS staatssecretaris politieke zaken

Oorlogshitser
Victoria Nuland, wordt hoogstwaarschijnlijk door Biden genomineerd
als zijn staatssecretaris politieke zaken….* Volgens World Beyond
War was Nuland adviseur van vicepresident Dick Cheney (onder George W.
Bush), later was zij van 2005 tot 2008 VS ambassadeur bij de NAVO,
waar ze eigenlijk meer te zeggen had dan de secretaris generaal, in
dat geval CDA oplichter de Hoop Scheffer, die dan ook na één
termijn kon opzouten daar hij zwaar ondermaats presteerde, o.a. volgens Nuland**. (de NAVO staat al vanaf de oprichting onder militair opperbevel van de VS en fungeert daarom in feite als de oorlogshond van de groootste terreurentiteit ter wereld: de VS…..)

Nuland
is ook één van de hoofdverantwoordelijken voor de oorlog in
Oekraïne (waarvoor Hillary Clinton als minister van BuZa onder Obama
de fundamenten legde en e.e.a. betaalde met 5 miljard dollar >> zelf hield ik het altijd op 4 miljard, maar steeds meer bronnen stellen dat
het 5 miljard moet zijn)…… Nuland zat o.a.achter het installeren van
fascist Arseniy Yatsenyuk als juntaleider en opvolger van de verjaagde democratisch
gekozen Oekraïense president Janoekovytsj, een duidelijke staatsgreep die het westen nog steeds zo weigert te noemen……

Op het
Maidanplein in Kiev deelde Nuland koekjes uit (tja weer ‘s wat anders
dan kogels en bommen), hetzelfde plein waarvoor de CIA
scherpschutters had ingehuurd die de politie en het publiek onder
vuur hebben genomen, om dit als false flag operatie in de schoenen
van Janoekovytsj te schuiven……. Terwijl Duitsland Polen en
Frankrijk overleg voerden met de regering Janoekovytsj over
vervroegde verkiezingen, namen neonazi’s het heft in eigen handen en
hebben de regering verjaagd, waarbij ze de eerder genoemde Arseniy
Yatsenyuk aanstelden als president….Ten overvloede bewees de VS
toen nogmaals een terreurentiteit te zijn, daar ze de neonazi
regering onmiddellijk erkenden….. (en reken maar dat Nuland ook in deze zaak een belangrijke rol speelde….)

Nuland
werkte openlijk met de neonazi partij Svoboda, voorts heeft zij zich
ingezet om Oekraïne het modernste oorlogstuig te geven en als kers
op de taart heeft zij zich ingezet voor Joe Biden, destijds de vicepresident
van de VS, om de zittende Oekraïense junta onder druk te zetten, de openbaar aanklager te vervangen, daar deze
de misdadige handel en wandel van Hunter Biden onderzocht….. (Biden
gaf zelfs toe dat hij de regering in Oekraïne onder druk had gezet
deze aanklager te ontslaan daar Oekraïne anders geen wapens zou
krijgen van de VS…..) Ofwel oorlogshoer Nuland kan wel een potje
breken bij Biden….

Uiteraard
heeft ze Rusland voortdurend gedemoniseerd met leugens en andere
achterklap, pleitte ze voor NAVO bases aan de grens met Rusland en
zoveel mogelijk ook voor de Russen zichtbare militaire oefeningen
langs de grens met hun land…… Ze wil de oude wapenrace tussen de VS en Rusland nieuw leven inblazen en zo Rusland failliet te laten gaan, echter ze vergeet dat de VS staatsschuld vergeleken met de 80er jaren van de vorige eeuw nu zo gigantisch groot is, dat elk ander land al lang failliet zou zijn verklaard en het wachten is dan ook niet of de dollarkoers zal inklappen maar wanneer dat zal gebeuren en die dag kan dichterbij zijn dan deskundigen denken……. (op die dag zal ook ons geld geen fluit meer waard zijn)

Ach ja,
World Beyond War maakt zich druk maar wat wil je met een president
die al voor zijn aantreden tot de nek in het bloed van ontelbare
slachtoffers staat…… Nogmaals geeft ook dit geheel overbodig nog
eens aan dat er met Biden alleen maar meer (illegale) oorlogsvoering is te verwachten……..

Nuland’s
Nomination Should Be Rejected

By World BEYOND War, January 11,
2021

Victoria Nuland, former foreign
policy adviser to vice president Dick Cheney, should not be nominated
for Undersecretary of State, and if nominated should be rejected by
the Senate.

Nuland played a key role in
facilitating a coup in Ukraine that created a civil war costing
10,000 lives and displacing over a million people. She played a key
role in arming Ukraine as well. She advocates radically increased
military spending, NATO expansion, hostility toward Russia, and
efforts to overthrow the Russian government.

The United States invested $5
billion in shaping Ukrainian politics, including overthrowing a
democratically elected president who had refused to join NATO.
Then-Assistant Secretary of State Nuland is on video
talking about the U.S. investment and on audiotape
planning to install Ukraine’s next leader, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who
was subsequently installed.

The Maidan protests, at which
Nuland handed out cookies to protesters, were violently escalated by
neo-Nazis and by snipers who opened fire on police. When Poland,
Germany, and France negotiated a deal for the Maidan demands and an
early election, neo-Nazis instead attacked the government and took
over. The U.S. State Department immediately recognized the coup
government, and Arseniy Yatsenyuk was installed as Prime Minister.

Nuland has worked
with
the openly pro-Nazi Svoboda Party in Ukraine. She was long a
leading proponent
of arming Ukraine. She was also an advocate for removing from office
the prosecutor general of Ukraine, whom then-Vice President Joe Biden
pushed the president to remove.

Nuland wrote
this past year that “The challenge for the United States in 2021
will be to lead the democracies of the world in crafting a more
effective approach to Russia—one that builds on their strengths and
puts stress on Putin where he is vulnerable, including among his own
citizens.”

She added: “…Moscow should also
see that Washington and its allies are taking concrete steps to shore
up their security and raise the cost of Russian confrontation and
militarization. That includes maintaining robust defense budgets,
continuing to modernize U.S. and allied nuclear weapons systems, and
deploying new conventional missiles and missile defenses, . . .
establish permanent bases along NATO’s eastern border, and increase
the pace and visibility of joint training exercises.”

The United States walked out of the
ABM Treaty and later the INF Treaty, began putting missiles into
Romania and Poland, expanded NATO to Russia’s border, facilitated a
coup in Ukraine, began arming Ukraine, and started holding massive
war rehearsal exercises in Eastern Europe. But to read Victoria
Nuland’s account, Russia is simply an irrationally evil and
aggressive force that must be countered by yet more military
spending, bases, and hostility. Some U.S. military
officials say
this demonizing of Russia is all about weapons
profits and bureaucratic power, no more fact-based than the Steele
Dossier that was given
to the FBI
by Victoria Nuland.

SIGNED BY:
Alaska Peace
Center
Center for Encounter and Active
Non-Violence
CODEPINK
Global Network Against Weapons &
Nuclear Power in Space
Greater Brunswick PeaceWorks
Jemez
Peacemakers
Knowdrones.com
Maine Voices for Palestinian
Rights
MK Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence
Nuclear Age Peace
Foundation
Nukewatch
Peace Action Maine
PEACEWORKERS
Physicians
for Social Responsibility – Kansas City
Progressive Democrats of
America
Peace Fresno
Peace, Justice, Sustainability NOW!
The
Resistance Center for Peace and Justice
RootsAction.org
Veterans
For Peace Chapter 001
Veterans For Peace Chapter 63
Veterans
For Peace Chapter 113
Veterans For Peace Chapter 115
Veterans
For Peace Chapter 132
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for
Sanity
Wage Peace
World BEYOND War

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

*  De taken van dat ministerie: Het beheren van de Amerikaanse
ambassades en consulaten en korps van diplomaten. Het beschermen van
Amerikaanse staatsburgers in het buitenland. Het assisteren van
Amerikaanse bedrijven op de internationale markt. (tekst van Wikipedia)

**
CDA kloot de Hoop Scheffer, tegenwoordig gvd ook leraar aan een hoge
school, kreeg de functie bij de NAVO als beloning voor het meedoen van Nederland
aan de illegale oorlog tegen Irak, steun en militaire deelname zowel
voorafgaand aan die oorlog als daarna, dus niet alleen politieke
steun zoals vreemd genoeg een flink aantal mensen denkt…….
Ondanks dat die oorlog was gebaseerd op leugens, heeft de Hoop
Scheffer nog steeds geen spijt van de Nederlandse deelname aan deze
oorlog die gezien moet worden als één van de ergste vormen van
terreur!! In die oorlog zijn meer dan 2,5 miljoen mensen
vermoord……… Ofwel een oorlogsmisdadiger mag in dit land gewoon
les geven (en dan is hij ook nog eens prominent CDA lid….)……

Zie ook: ‘Joe Biden heeft al lang toegegeven dat hij Oekraïne onder druk zette een openbaar aanklager te ontslaan die zijn zoon vervolgde

MH17 vliegramp: wat je niet zou mogen weten over Maleisië, het JIT en Oekraïne…‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht naar meer artikelen over de ramp met vlucht MH17)

VS subsidiëring van neonazi’s in Oekraïne, neonazi’s die ook fascisten uit de VS trainen……

Seymour Hersh (gelauwerd journalist) met onthullingen o.a. over de VS plannen met het Midden-Oosten en de vergiftiging van de Skripals

Muellers onzinnige beschuldiging die Russiagate zou bewijzen……..

Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump‘ (artikel in Nederlands; zie ook de links in dat bericht)

De Russiagate samenzweringstheorie dient de machthebbers………

Oekraïne, wat de reguliere (massa-) media, ‘deskundigen’ en politici u niet vertellen over dit door een junta geregeerd land‘ 

Oekraïne, een mislukte, corrupte en fascistische staat……..

Turkey-deal: het opdelen van Syrië t.b.v. gas- en oliepijpleidingen…..

Van Wolferen, oud-hoogleraar: “Monsterverbond tussen media en elites, Nederlanders papegaaien Amerikaanse propaganda kritiekloos na”‘ 

MH17, een aantal feiten die u niet te horen krijgt van de reguliere media, of de politiek, die vooral anti-Russische propaganda spuien, dag in dag uit……‘ (en zie de links naar meer artikelen over MH17 in dat bericht)

Samenzweringstheorie paniek wordt juist gevoed door ‘tegenstanders’ daarvan

Nicholas
Levis heeft op CounterPunch een artikel geschreven waarin hij betoogt
dat juist de figuren die complotten uitwerken, mensen aanwijzen als de makers van
samenzweringstheorieën (of complot
theorieën, wat je wilt), als deze het complot blootleggen die zij de
rest van de bevolking willen opdringen. Het is als met de hysterie
over fake news in de reguliere media (en politiek), waar journalisten
zelfs durven te eisen dat er censuurmaatregelen moeten worden genomen tegen bepaalde sites op de
sociale media, daar men fake news zou verspreiden……. Terwijl diezelfde media keer op keer fake news (nepnieuws)
brengen, sterker nog: fake news brengen op basis waarvan illegale
oorlogen zijn aangegaan door de VS, weliswaar aantoonbaar ingegeven door leugens van de
geheime diensten van de VS, maar met grote graagte overgenomen door die reguliere (massa-) media…… 

Levis
wijst dan ook niet voor niets naar de illegale oorlog van de VS tegen
Irak, waar het volk (ook in de EU) werd voorbereid op deze oorlog met
de hersenspoeling van het volk door politici en media met leugens als
zou Saddam Hoessein, destijds president van Irak, geheime voorraden
massavernietigingswapens in bezit hebben gehad….. Een enorme
leugen waartegen VN-wapeninspecteur Blix als een Don Quichot
tegen vocht, keer op keer liet hij de wereld weten dat Irak zelfs
geen massavernietigingswapens kon hebben, al deze wapens waren
vernietigd en men had bij wijze van spreken elke vierkante meter van
het land onderzocht……

Ook Henk Hofland, die door de Nederlandse pers als belangrijkste journalist van de 20ste eeuw wordt vereerd, geloofde deze leugen en ventileerde die op de NRC, de ‘slijpsteen van de
geest’ (eerder de overdosis morfine voor de geest)….. Let wel,
ik zeg ‘geloofde’, echter Hofland moet dondersgoed geweten hebben dat
dit een pertinente leugen was en toch stelde hij zich achter de
illegale oorlog tegen Irak, wat hij tot zijn dood is blijven doen,
ondanks dat deze leugen werd doorgeprikt….. (Hofland, de Nederlandse journalist van de
20ste eeuw… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!)

Alle
terechte ontkenningen van Blix konden niet op tegen de leugens die de geheime diensten en de Bush administratie de wereld inbrachten, dit met grote hulp van de
reguliere media die het volk opzweepten….. Gezien het voorgaande kan je
deze zaak niet anders zien dan de grootste samenzweringstheorie van
deze eeuw, waar belachelijk genoeg de tegenstanders van die illegale
oorlog destijds complottheoriedenkers werden genoemd!!!!! Kortom de
wereld op de kop…….

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

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

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

September
16, 2020

Conspiracy
Panic

by Nicholas
Levis

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

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

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

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

Given their failure to actually
fight Trump on policy, and given the Democrats’ embrace of Bushian
politics and Bush-era war criminals, austerity, and imperialism, and
given their propping-up of a right-wing candidate who has his own
degree of involvement in Trump-style nepotism and is visibly
suffering from cognitive impairment, Trump would be cruising to
reelection. Cruising, that is, except for the unpredictable factors
of Covid, the Depression, and the open outbreaks of organized fascist
street violence that he praises. And because a real opposition to
this regime’s particular horrors exists, and has not surrendered.
(If they lose, the Democrats will blame the real opposition, and are
already doing so preemptively.) 

Thus, for the moment, Trump is well
behind in the polls, despite the four-year favor to him delivered by
the #Russiagate operation with its demand for 24/7 coverage and
predictable serial failures.

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

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

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

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

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

They are the products of modern public relations and popular
mood management.

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

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

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

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

Zie ook:

9/11 werd mede georganiseerd door Israël‘ 

Opname van 100 kinderen en andere kwetsbare mensen is een schandelijke doek voor het bloeden (en dat op de herdenking van 9/11)‘ 

Echte democratie is onbestaanbaar zolang de reguliere media de bevolking manipuleren met fake news, andere leugens en (neoliberale) propaganda‘ 

VS propagandamachine onder de loep genomen door schrijver Nick Schou‘ 

‘Respectabele burgers’ vs. samenzweringstheoretici‘ 

De onderbroekbom-leugen ten behoeve van onveilige body scanners

Voor meer berichten over complottheorie, Irak, 911, Bush, Cheney en/of Blix, klik op het betreffende label, direct onder dit bericht.

9/11 werd mede georganiseerd door Israël

De aanslagen van 9/11 (2001) werden niet door Al Qaida georganiseerd, iedereen die de officiële lezing nog steeds gelooft kan hiervan overtuigd worden mits deze enige tijd steekt in het lezen van rapporten en onderzoeken door
onafhankelijke organisaties, of door verklaringen van deskundigen, politeagenten en brandweermensen >> deze
aanslagen werden minstens gepleegd met medeweten en organisatie van
de federale overheid van de VS…….

Lauren
Guyénot schreef een artikel voor The Unz Review, dat door mij werd
overgenomen van Information Clearing House (ICH). Hierin betoogt hij dat
Israël de grote dader is achter de 9/11 aanslagen in 2001, uiteraard
met de toevoeging dat e.e.a niet mogelijk was zonder de hulp van de
VS overheid…..

Eén van de grootste bewijzen dat hier enorm is gelogen is wel het feit dat de vliegtuigen onmogelijk het instorten van de WTC torens konden hebben veroorzaakt…… Over die vliegtuigen gesproken: het was destijds onmogelijk om boven de stad te vliegen zonder dat de luchtmacht in zou grijpen en oh toevel die dag waren er geen straaljagers paraat om in te grijpen, daarnaast stellen ervaren piloten dat het bijzxonder moeilijk is om met een verkeersvliegtuig zo precies de toren in te vliegen (de piloten zoude de daders zijn geweest die trainig hadden gekregen in kleine vliegtuigen, maar die niet eens wisten hoe te moeten landen…)

Moet
wel opmerken dat Gyénot vooral Israël ziet als het land dat het
meest heeft geprofiteerd van deze aanslag, echter daar ben ik het
niet mee eens, immers de werkelijke grote profiteur van deze
aanslagen is de VS zelf en daarmee bedoel ik ook het Pentagon en de
rest van het militair-industrieel complex. De oorlog tegen terreur
deed de kassa’s van de wapenindustrie hard rinkelen, terwijl
het instorten van de Sovjet-Unie er op z’n zachts gezegd voor zorgde dat de winsten
van die industrie in de tien voorgaande jaren onder druk stonden…. Als gevolg van 9/11 kreeg het Pentagon er fiks wat geld bij, terwijl de geheime diensten (meer dan 25 in de VS!!) extra geld en bevoegdheden kregen…….

Bovendien was oorlog voeren, het ultieme
gevolg van die aanslagen (zoals de illegale oorlogen tegen Afghanistan
en Irak), ook een garantie voor extra geld in de kluizen van de
oliemaatschappijen (immers de koersen van oliemaatscfhappijen gaan dan omhoog), die daarnaast zelfs toestemming kregen voor het
winnen van olie op niet eerder geziene plekken (en dan bedoel ik niet alleen in Irak), gevolgd door de
peperdure en milieu-verrampenerende schaliegas, en -oliewinning)…. 

George W. Bush, destijds president,
stond in de peilingen over zijn populariteit lager dan
in vele decennia was gezien bij een zittende president, 9/11, de oorlog tegen terreur en de illegale oorlog tegen Afghanistan zorgden ervoor dat zijn populariteit als een speer de lucht inging……

Voorts verdween op 11 september 2001 een fiks deel van de VS
overheidsschuld, daar bepaalde servers in het WTC werden
vernietigd….. Dit nog naast het verdwijnen van een flinke voorraad goud…… Me dunkt alles bij elkaar fikse belangen voor de VS
zelf……

Al is het wel zo dat naast andere belangrijke figuren in Israël, ook Netanyahu blij was met de aanslag, daar de VS nu wist wat het betekende terreur op eigen grondgebioed te hebben (al had men daar al veel eerder meerdere terreuraanslagen), terwijl Israël al decennia te maken had met terreuraanslagen (vooral zelf uitgevoerd tegen het verdrukte Palestijnse volk…)…. Netanyahu stelde dan ook dat dit de banden tussen de twee landen verder zou versterken……. Het is wel zeker dat Israël, in de vorm van de Mossad, de geheime dienst van dat land, heeft meegeholpen aan de aanslagen…… Moet je nagaan: na de aanslagen beschuldigde men de Palestijnen er onterecht van feest te hebben gevierd n.a.v. die aanslagen….. (in New York werden 5 Joodse Israëliërs betrapt die feestvierden terwijl ze aan de overkant van een rivier de rokende puinhopen bekeken van de Twin Towers….)

Bij de aanslagen op het
WTC zouden 3.000 mensen zijn omgekomen, echter in de ‘war on terror’ die
de Bush administratie daarna ontketende zijn minstens 2 miljoen mensen
omgekomen en hebben de grote wapenfabrikanten en die van vliegend-,
varend- en rollend oorlogstuig zich helemaal scheel verdiend…… Dit
nog naast de zoals gezegd enorme budgetverhogingen voor leger en geheime diensten,
waar de laatsten ook nog eens veel meer bevoegdheden kregen, o.a.
middels de Patriot Act, die nu weer in het nieuws is daar een federale
rechter heeft bepaald dat het bespioneren van VS burgers illegaal is, dit bespioneren werd geopenbaard
door Edward Snowden in 2013…..*

Kritiek en weerlegging van de leugens over de aanslagen van 9/11 worden gezien als een complottheorieën, echter het echte complot is juist het neerhalen van de torens** middels deze ‘aanslagen’ en de aanslag op het Pentagon waarvan het vliegtuig niet werd gevonden…. Een ander vliegtuig dat gekaapt was, zou elders in een natuurgebied zijn neergestort, maar ook daarvan werd geen spoor gevonden…….
 

Lees het uitgebreide artikel van Guyénot, het is meer dan de moeite
waard en geeft ten overvloede nog eens aan dat 9/11 een false flag
operatie was ten dienste van wat mij betreft vooral de VS!! (vergeet
niet dat Osama bin Laden bij herhaling stelde dat Al Qaida niet
betrokken was bij deze aanslagen, terwijl terreurgroepen als Al Qaida
maar al te graag de verantwoording opeisen van geslaagde aanslagen,
zelfs als ze er niets mee te maken hebben….. Niet voor niets werd
Osama bin Laden onmiddellijk vermoord door speciale VS (terreur) commando’s toen men hem aantrof in Pakistan, het was uiteraard
niet de bedoeling dat bin Laden uit de school zou klappen tijdens een proces….

9/11
Was an Israeli Job
How
America was neoconned into World War IV
By
Laurent Guyénot

 

Technical
impossibilities

September
13, 2020 “
Information
Clearing House

–  Thanks to courageous investigators, many anomalies in the
official explanation of the events of 9/11 were posted on the
Internet in the following months, providing evidence that this was a
false flag operation, and that Osama bin Laden was innocent, as he
repeatedly declared in the Afghan and Pakistani press and on Al
Jazeera.[1] The proofs of this appalling fraud have been accumulating
ever since, and are now accessible to anyone willing to spend a few
hours of research on the Web. (Although, while preparing this
article, I noticed that Google is now making access to that research
more difficult than it was five years ago, artificially prioritizing
anti-conspiracy sites.)

For
example, members of Architects
and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
have demonstrated that it was
impossible for plane crashes and jet fuel fires to trigger the
collapse of the Twin Towers. Even Donald
Trump understood this
. In fact, speaking of “collapse” is
perhaps misleading: the towers literally exploded, pulverizing
concrete and projecting pieces of steel beams weighing several
hundred tons hundreds of meters laterally at high speeds. The
pyroclastic
dust
that immediately flooded through the streets, not unlike the
dust from a volcano, indicates a high temperature mixture of hot
gasses and relatively dense solid particles, an impossible phenomenon
in a simple collapse. It is also impossible that WTC7,
another skyscraper (47 stories), which had not been hit by a plane,
collapsed into its own footprint at near free-fall speed, unless by
“controlled demolition.”

Testimonies
of firefighters
recorded shortly after the events describe
sequences of explosions just before the “collapse”, well below
the plane impact. The presence of molten metal in the wreckage up to
three weeks after the attack is inexplicable except by the presence
of incompletely burned explosives. Firefighter Philip Ruvolo
testified before Étienne Sauret’s camera for his film
Collateral
Damages

(2011): “You’d get down below and you’d see molten steel—molten
steel running down the channelways, like you were in a foundry—like
lava.”

Aviation
professionals
have also reported impossibilities in the behavior
of the planes. The charted speeds of the two aircraft hitting the
Twin Towers, 443 mph and 542 mph, exclude these aircraft being Boeing
767s, because these speeds are virtually impossible near ground
level. In the unlikely event such speeds could be attained without
the aircraft falling apart, flying them accurately into the towers
was mission impossible, especially by the amateur pilots blamed for
the hijacking. Hosni
Mubarak, a former pilot, said he could never do it
. (He is not
the only head of state to have voiced his doubts: Chavez
and Ahmadinejad
are among them.) Recall that neither of the black boxes of the
jetliners was ever found, an incomprehensible situation.

And
of course, there are the obvious anomalies of Shanksville and
Pentagon crash sites: no plane or credible plane debris can be seen
on any of the numerous photos easily available.

Inside
Job or Mossad Job?

Among
the growing number of Americans who disbelieve the official version
of the 9/11 attacks, two basic theories are in competition: I called
them “inside job” and “Mossad job”. 

The first one is the
dominant thesis within the so-called 9/11 Truth movement, and blames
the American government, or a faction within the American Deep State.
The second one claims that the masterminds were members of a powerful
Israeli network deeply infiltrated in all spheres of power within the
US, including media, government, military and secret services.

This
“Mossad job” thesis has been gaining ground since Alan Sabrosky,
a professor at the U.S. Army War College and the U.S. Military
Academy, published in July 2012 an
article entitled “Demystifying 9/11: Israel and the Tactics of
Mistake”
, where he voiced his 

conviction that September 11th
was “a classic Mossad-orchestrated operation.”

We
can notice from the outset that incriminating Israelis or Arabs are
both “outside job” theories (in fact, they are mirror images of
each other, which is understandable in light of what Gilad Atzmon
explains about Jewish “projected guilt”).[2] Before even looking
at the evidence, “outside job” sounds more credible that “inside
job”. There is something monstrous in the idea that a government
can deceive and terrorize its own citizens by killing thousands of
them, just for starting a series of wars that are not even in the
nation’s interest. By comparison, a foreign power attacking the
U.S. under the false flag of a third power almost seems like fair
play. Indeed suspicion of Israel’s role should be natural to anyone
aware of the reputation of the Mossad as: “Wildcard. Ruthless and
cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a
Palestinian/Arab act,” in the words of a report of the U.S. Army
School for Advanced Military Studies quoted
by the
Washington
Times
,
September 10
th,
2001
— the day before the attacks.

This
is an important point, because it raises the question of how and why
the 9/11 Truth movement has been led to endorse massively the
outrageous “inside job” thesis without even considering the more
likely thesis of an attack by a foreign power acting under an Islamic
false flag—and what foreign power but Israel would do that?

Of
course, the two dissenting theses do not necessarily exclude each
other; at least, no one incriminating Israel denies that corrupted
elements from the American administration or deep state were
involved. The “passionate
attachment”
between Israel and the U.S. has been going on for
decades, and 9/11 is one of its monstruous offsprings.

I
can think of no better symbol of that reality than the marriage of
Ted and Barbara
Olson
. Ted Oslon, after having defended Bush in the disputed 2000
election, had been rewarded with the post of Solicitor General (he
also defended Dick Cheney when he refused to submit to Congress
Enron-related documents). Barbara was a famous CNN reporter, but
before that, she was born Barbara Kay Bracher of Jewish parents,
educated at Yeshiva University School of Law, and hired by the legal
firm WilmerHale, of which Jamie Gorelick, a future member of the 9/11
Commission, was also a member, and whose clients include powerful
Israeli firms like Amdocs, a digital communication company charged
with spying for
Israel in the United States
. On September 11, 2001, Barbara Olson
alledgedly was on flight AA77, from which she made two telephone
calls to her husband. Her calls were reported on CNN in the
afternoon, and contributed to crystallize some details of the
official story, such as the “box cutters” used as only weapons by
the hijackers. Repeatedly invited on television shows after 9/11, Ted
Olson frequently contradicted himself when questioned about the calls
from his wife. In a 2006 report, the FBI identified only one call
from Barbara Olson, and it was an unconnected call lasting 0 seconds.
Like all other reported phone calls from desperate passengers
(including the famous “Hi, Mom. This is Mark Bingham”), Barbara’s
call was simply impossible, because the technology required to make
high-altitude phone calls was not developed until 2004.[3]

9/11
was made possible by an alliance between secret worshippers of Israel
and corrupted American elements. The question is: who, of the two,
were the masterminds of this incredibly daring and complex operation,
and for what “higher purpose”?

Another
question is: why do those who keep repeating as a mantra “9/11
was an inside job”
ignore totally the compelling evidence
pointing to Israel? In other words, to what extent do they constitute
a “controlled opposition” intended to cover up for Israel? Asking
this type of question does not mean suspecting anyone who defends an
erroneous or incomplete theory of being a hypocrite. Most people
defending one theory or the other do so sincerely, based on the
information to which they have access. I have myself been a believer
in the official theory for 7 years, and in the “inside job”
theory for 2 years, before progressively moving on to the present
argument from 2010. On the other hand, we can assume that those who
lead the public into error on a long term are not just mistaken but
lying. In any case, it is legitimate to investigate the background of
opinion makers, and when they are caught lying or distorting the
truth, we can speculate on their motivation. I will come back to this
issue at the end of the article.

The
dancing Israelis

Researchers
who believe Israel orchestrated 9/11 cite the behavior of a group of
individuals who have come to be known as the “dancing Israelis”
since their arrest, though their aim was to pass as “dancing
Arabs.” Dressed in ostensibly “Middle Eastern” attire, they
were seen by various witnesses standing on the roof of a van parked
in Jersey City, cheering and taking photos of each other with the WTC
in the background, at the very moment the first plane hit the North
Tower. The suspects then moved their van to another parking spot in
Jersey City, where other witnesses saw them deliver the same
ostentatious celebrations.

One
anonymous call to the police in Jersey City, reported the same day by
NBC News, mentioned “a white van, 2 or 3 guys in there. They
look like Palestinians and going around a building. […] I see the
guy by Newark Airport mixing some junk and he has those sheikh
uniforms. […] He’s dressed like an Arab.” The police soon
issued the following BOLO alert (be-on-the-look-out) for a “Vehicle
possibly related to New York terrorist attack. White, 2000 Chevrolet
van with New Jersey registration with ‘Urban Moving Systems’ sign
on back seen at Liberty State Park, Jersey City, NJ, at the time of
first impact of jetliner into World Trade Center. Three individuals
with van were seen celebrating after initial impact and subsequent
explosion.”

By
chance, the van was intercepted around 4 pm, with five young men
inside: Sivan and Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner, and Omer
Marmari. Before any question was asked, the driver, Sivan Kurzberg,
burst out: “We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems
are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem”.The Kurzberg
brothers were formally identified as Mossad agents. All five
officially worked for a moving company (a classic cover for
espionage) named Urban Moving Systems, whose owner, Dominik Otto
Suter, fled the country for Tel Aviv on September 14.[4]

This
event was first reported the day after the attacks by journalist
Paulo
Lima in the New Jersey newspaper
The
Bergen Record
,
based on “sources close to the investigation” who were convinced
of the suspects’ foreknowledge of the morning’s attacks: “It
looked like they knew what was going to happen when they were at
Liberty State Park”.The 579-page FBI
report on the investigation
that followed (partially declassified
in 2005) reveals several important facts. First, once developed, the
photos taken by the suspects while watching the North Tower on fire
confirm their attitudes of celebration: “They smiled, they hugged
each other and they appeared to ‘high five’ one another”. To
explain their contentment, the suspects said they were simply happy
that, thanks to these terrorist attacks, “the United States will
take steps to stop terrorism in the world”. Yet at this point,
before the second tower was hit, most Americans believed the crash
was an accident. The five Israelis were found connected to another
company called Classic International Movers, which employed five
other Israelis arrested for their contacts with the nineteen presumed
suicide hijackers. In addition, one of the five suspects had called
“an individual in South America with authentic ties to Islamic
militants in the middle east”. Finally, the FBI report states that
the “The vehicle was also searched by a trained bomb-sniffing dog
which yielded a positive result for the presence of explosive
traces”.

After
all this incriminating evidence comes the most puzzling passage of
the report: its conclusion that “the FBI no longer has any
investigative interests in the detainees and they should proceed with
the appropriate immigration proceedings”. In fact, a letter
addressed to the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, dated
September 25, 2001, proves that, less than two weeks after the
events, the FBI federal headquarter had already decided to close the
investigation, asking that “The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization
Service should proceed with the appropriate immigration proceedings”.
The five “dancing Israelis”, also known as “the high fivers”
,
were detained 71 days in a Brooklyn prison, where they first refused,
then failed, lie detector tests. Finally, they were quietly returned
to Israel under the minimal charge of “visa violation.” Three of
them were then invited on an Israeli TV talk show in November 2001,
where one of them ingenuously declared: “Our
purpose was simply to document the event.”

The
Israeli spy network

The
five “dancing Israelis,” the only suspects arrested on the very
day of the 9/11 attacks, were just the tip of an iceberg. In
September 2001, the federal police were busy dismantling the largest
Israeli spy network ever uncovered on American soil. In the summer
preceding the attack, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) compiled a
report which would be revealed to the public by the
Washington
Post
on
November 23
rd,
2001, followed by a Carl
Cameron’s four-part documentary broadcast on Fox News
from
December 11
th,
2001. On March 14
th,
2002, an article in French newspaper
Le
Monde

signed by Sylvain Cypel also referred to the report, shortly before
the French magazine
Intelligence
Online

made it fully
accessible on the Internet
.[5] It said that 140 Israeli spies,
aged between 20 and 30, had been arrested since March 2001, while 60
more were arrested after September 11. 

Generally posing as art
students, they visited at least “36 sensitive sites of the
Department of Defense.” “A majority of those questioned have
stated they served in military intelligence, electronic signal
intercept, or explosive ordnance units. Some have been linked to
high-ranking officials in the Israeli military. One was the son of a
two-star general, one served as the bodyguard to the head of the
Israeli Army, one served in a Patriot mission unit.” Another, Peer
Segalovitz, officer in the 605 Battalion of the Golan Heights,
“acknowledged he could blow up buildings, bridges, cars, and
anything else that he needed to.”[6]

Of
special interest is the mention that “the Hollywood, Florida, area
seems to be a central point for these individuals.”[7] More than 30
out of the 140 fake Israeli students identified before 9/11 lived in
that city of 140,000 inhabitants. And this city also happens to be
the place where fifteen of the nineteen alleged 9/11 Islamist
hijackers had regrouped (nine in Hollywood, six in the vicinity),
including four of the five supposed to have hijacked Flight AA11.
What was the relationship between the Israeli spies and the Islamist
terrorists? We were told by mainstream
news
that the former were monitoring the latter, but failed to
report suspicious activities of these terrorists to American
authorities. From such a presentation, Israel comes out clean, since
a spy agency cannot be blamed for not sharing information with the
country it is spying in. At worst, the Israeli Intelligence can be
accused of “letting it happen”—a guarantee of impunity. In
reality, the Israeli agents were certainly not just monitoring the
future “hijackers,” but financing and manipulating them, before
disposing of them. We know that Israeli Hanan Serfaty, who rented two
flats near Mohamed Atta, had handled at least $100,000 in three
months. And we also learned from the
New
York Times

on February 19, 2009
, that Ali al-Jarrah, cousin of the alleged
hijacker of Flight UA93 Ziad al-Jarrah, had spent twenty-five years
spying for the Mossad as an undercover agent infiltrating the
Palestinian resistance and Hezbollah.

Israeli
agents apparently appreciate operating under the cover of artists.
Shortly before September 11, a group of fourteen Jewish “artists”
under the name of Gelatin
installed themselves on the ninety-first floor of the north tower of
the World Trade Center. There, as a work of “street art,” they
removed a window and extended a wooden balcony. To understand what
role this piece of scaffolding may have played, it must be remembered
that the explosion supposedly resulting from the impact of the Boeing
AA11 on the North Tower took place between the ninety-second and the
ninety-eighth floors. With the only film of the impact on the North
Tower being that of the Naudet brothers, who are under suspicion for
numerous reasons, many researchers are convinced that no aircraft hit
this tower, and that the explosion simulating the impact was provoked
by pre-planted explosives inside the tower.

Floors
ninety-three to one hundred of the North Tower were occupied by Marsh
& McLennan, whose CEO was Jeffrey Greenberg, son of wealthy
Zionist (and financier of George W. Bush) Maurice Greenberg, who also
happens to be the owner of Kroll Inc., the firm in charge of security
for the entire World Trade Center complex on 9/11. The Greenbergs
were also the insurers of the Twin Towers and, on July 24, 2001, they
took the precaution of having the contract reinsured by competitors.
In November 2000, the board of directors of Marsh & McLennan was
joined by (Lewis) Paul Bremer, the chairman of the National
Commission on Terrorism, who, on September 11, 2001, two hours only
after the pulverization of the North Tower, would appear
on NBC to name bin Laden as prime suspect
, perfectly calm as 400
of his employees are missing (295 will finally be declared dead). “It
is the day that will change our lives,” he said. “It is the day
when the war that the terrorists declared on the US [. . .] has been
brought home to the US.” In 2003, Bremer would be appointed
administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq to level
the Iraqi state to the ground and oversee the theft of almost a
trillion dollars intended for its reconstruction.

The
super-sayanim

With
Goldberg and Bremer, we have reached the upper level of the
conspiracy, comprising a number of influential Jewish personalities,
working inside and outside the U.S. government — super-
sayanim,
so to speak. The most representative of those outside government is
Larry Silverstein, the real estate shark who, with his partner Frank
Lowy, leased the Twin Towers from New York City in the spring of
2001. The head of the New York Port Authority, who granted
Silverstein and Lowy the lease, was none other than Lewis Eisenberg,
another member of the United Jewish Appeal Federation and former
vice-president of AIPAC. It appeared that Silverstein had made a
disastrous deal, because the
Twin Towers had to be decontaminated for asbestos
. The
decontamination process had been indefinitely postponed since the
1980s because of its cost, estimated at nearly $1 billion in 1989. In
2001, the New York Port Authority had been all too happy to shift
responsibility to Silverstein.

Immediately
after acquiring the Twin Towers, Silverstein renegotiated the
insurance contracts to cover terrorist attacks, doubling the coverage
to $3.5 billion, and made sure he would retain the right to rebuild
after such an event. After the attacks, he took his insurers to court
in order to receive double compensation, claiming that the two planes
were two separate attacks. After a long legal battle, he
pocketed $4.5 billion
. Silverstein is a leading member of the
United Jewish Appeal Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York,
the biggest fundraiser for Israel (after the US government, which
pays about $3 billion per year in aid to Israel). Silverstein also
maintained “close ties with Netanyahu,” according to
Haaretz
(November
21, 2001)
: “The two have been on friendly terms since
Netanyahu’s stint as Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations.
For years they kept in close touch. Every Sunday afternoon, New York
time, Netanyahu would call Silverstein.” Besides being a powerful
man, Larry is a lucky man: as
he explained in this interview
, every morning of the week, he had
breakfast at the
Windows
on the World

on top of the North Tower, but on September 11th, he had an
appointment with his dermatologist.

Accomplices
to the 9/11 false flag attack with strong Israeli connections should
also be tracked at the other end of the trajectory of the planes
reported to have crashed into the Twin Towers. Flights AA11 and UA175
took off from Logan Airport in Boston, which subcontracted their
security to International Consultants on Targeted Security (ICTS),
a firm based in Israel and headed by Menachem Atzmon
, a treasurer
of the Likud. So did Newark Airport where flight UA93 reportedly took
off before crashing in Shanksville.

A
serious investigation would follow many other trails, such as the
Odigo instant messages received by employees at the WTC two hours
before the plane crashes, as reported by
Haaretz
on
September 27
th,
2001. The first plane hit the WTC at the precise time announced,
“almost
to the minute,”
admitted Alex Diamandis, vice-president of
Odigo, headquartered in Israel. Also disturbing is the behavior of
the American branch of
Zim
Israel Navigational,

a maritime shipping giant 48% owned by the Jewish state (occasionally
used as a cover for the Israeli secret services), which moved its
offices from the WTC, along with its 200 employees, September 4
th,
2001, one week before the attacks —“like an act of God, we
moved”
,
said
the CEO Shaul Cohen-Mintz when interviewed
by
USA
Today
,
November 17
th,
2001
.

But
of course, none of these trails were ever pursued. That is because
the most powerful conspirators were at the highest level of the
Justice Department. Michael Chertoff was head of the Criminal
Division of the Department of Justice in 2001, and responsible, among
many other things, for securing the release of the Israeli agents
arrested before and after 9/11, including the “dancing Israelis.”
In 2003, this son of a rabbi and of a Mossad pioneer would be
appointed Secretary of Homeland Security, in charge of
counter-terrorism on the American soil, which allowed him to control
dissenting citizens and restrain access to the evidence under the
pretext of Sensitive Security Information.

Another
chief of the cover-up was Philip Zelikow, the executive director of
the 9/11 presidential Commission established in November 2002.
Zelikow is a self-styled specialist in the art of making “public
myths” by “‘searing’ or ‘molding’ events [that] take on
‘transcendent’ importance and, therefore, retain their power even
as the experiencing generation passes from the scene” (Wikipedia).
In December 1998, he co-signed an article for
Foreign
Affairs

entitled “Catastrophic Terrorism,”
in which he speculated on
what would have happened if the 1993 WTC bombing (already attributed
to bin Laden) had been done with a nuclear bomb: “An act of
catastrophic terrorism that killed thousands or tens of thousands of
people and/or disrupted the necessities of life for hundreds of
thousands, or even millions, would be a watershed event in America’s
history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented for
peacetime and undermine Americans’ fundamental sense of security
within their own borders in a manner akin to the 1949 Soviet atomic
bomb test, or perhaps even worse. … Like Pearl Harbor, the
event would divide our past and future into a before and after. The
United States might respond with draconian measures scaling back
civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention
of suspects and use of deadly force.” This is the man who
controlled the governmental investigation on the 9/11 terror attacks.
Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, who nominally led the commission,
revealed in their book
Without
Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission
(2006),
that the commission “was set up to fail” from the beginning.
Zelikow, they claim, had already written a synopsis and a conclusion
for the final report before the first meeting. He controlled all the
working groups, prevented them from communicating with each other,
and gave them as sole mission to prove the official story; Team 1A,
for example, was tasked to “tell the story of Al-Qaeda’s most
successful operation—the 9/11 attacks.”

A
tight control of mainstream media is perhaps the most delicate aspect
of the whole operation. I will not delve into that aspect, for we all
know what to expect from the MSM. For a groundbreaking argument on
the extent to which 9/11 was psy-op orchestrated by MSM, I recommend
Ace
Baker’s 2012 documentary
9/11
The Great American Psy-Opera
,
chapters
6, 7 and 8.

Machiavellian
meta-Zionists

If
we move up to the very highest level of the conspiracy, we find
ourselves in Tel Aviv. The preparation for 9/11 coincided with the
coming to power of Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996, followed by Ehud Barak
in July 1999, and Ariel Sharon in March 2001, who brought back
Netanyahu as minister of Foreign Affairs in 2002 (with Netanyahu
again becoming prime minister in 2009). It must be noted that both
Netanyahu and Ehud Barak were temporarily out of the Israeli
government in September 2001, just like Ben-Gurion at the time of
Kennedy’s assassination (read
my article on JFK
). A few months before 9/11, Barak, a former
head of Israeli military intelligence, was “recruited” as a
consultant to a Mossad front company, SCP Partner, specializing in
security and located less than seven miles from Urban Moving
Systems.[8] One hour after the explosion of the North Tower, Barak
was on BBC World
to point the finger at bin Laden (the first to
do so), and concluded: “It’s a time to launch an operational,
complete war against terror.”

As
for Netanyahu, we are not surprised to hear him boast, on CNN
in 2006
, of having predicted in 1995 that, “if the West doesn’t
wake up to the suicidal nature of militant Islam, the next thing you
will see is militant Islam bringing down the World Trade Center.”
Netanyahu is exemplary of the ever closer “special relationship”
between the US and Israel, which started with Truman and blossomed
under Johnson. Netanyahu had lived, studied, and worked in the United
States from 1960 to 1978, between his 11
th
and his 27
th
year—except during his military service—and again after the age
of 33, when he was appointed deputy ambassador to Washington and then
permanent delegate to the United Nations. Netanyahu appeared
regularly on CNN in the early 1990s, contributing to the
transformation of the world’s leading news channel into a major
Zionist propaganda tool. His political destiny was largely planned
and shaped in the United States, under the supervision of those we
now call neoconservatives, and the only thing that distinguishes him
from them is that, for public relations reasons, he does not possess
American nationality.

What’s
a neocon?” once asked Bush 43 to his father Bush 41, after more
than three years in the White House. “Do you want names, or a
description?” answered 41. “Description.” 

“Well,” said 41,
“I’ll give it to you in one word: Israel.”[9] That anecdote,
quoted by Andrew Cockburn, sums it up. The neoconservative movement
was born in the editorial office of the monthly magazine
Commentary,
which had replaced the
Contemporary
Jewish Record

in 1945 as the press organ of the American Jewish Committee. “If
there is an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews
can lay sole claim, neoconservatism is it,” wrote Gal
Beckerman in the
Jewish
Daily Forward
,
January
6, 2006. “It is a fact that as a political philosophy,
neoconservatism was born among the children of Jewish immigrants and
is now largely the intellectual domain of those immigrants’
grandchildren.”

The
founding fathers of neoconservatism (Norman Podhoretz, Irving
Kristol, Donald Kagan, Paul Wolfowitz, Adam Shulsky) were
self-proclaimed disciples of Leo Strauss, a German Jewish immigrant
teaching at the University of Chicago. Strauss can be characterized
as a meta-Zionist in the sense that, while an ardent supporter of the
State of Israel, he rejected the idea that Israel as a nation should
be contained within borders; Israel must retain her specificity,
which is to be everywhere, he said in essence in his 1962 lecture
“Why
We Remain Jews.”
Strauss would also approve of being called a
Machiavellian, for in his
Thoughts
on Machiavelli
,
he
praised the “the intrepidity of his thought, the grandeur of his
vision, and the graceful subtlety of his speech” (p. 13).
Machiavelli’s model of a prince was Cesar Borgia, the tyrant who
after having appointed the cruel Ramiro d’Orco to subdue the
province of Romania, had him executed with utter cruelty, thus
reaping the people’s gratitude after having diverted their hatred
onto another. Machiavelli, writes Strauss, “is a patriot of a
particular kind: He is more concerned with the salvation of his
fatherland than with the salvation of his soul” (p. 10). And that
happens to be exactly what Jewishness is all about, according to
Jewish thinkers such as Harry Waton: “The Jews that have a deeper
understanding of Judaism know that the only immortality there is for
the Jew is the immortality in the Jewish people” (read
more here
). As a matter of fact, in the
Jewish
World Review

of June 7, 1999
, Michael Ledeen, a neocon and founding member of
the
Jewish
Institute for National Security Affairs

(JINSA), assumed that Machiavelli must have been a “secret Jew,”
since “if you listen to his political philosophy you will hear
Jewish music.”

The
neoconservatives of the first generation originally positioned
themselves on the far left. Irving Kristol, one of the main editors
of Commentary, had long claimed to be a Trotskyist. It was
soon after the 1967 successful annexation of Arab territories by
Israel that the Straussians experienced their conversion to
right-wing militarism, to which they owe their new name. Norman
Podhoretz, editor-in-chief from 1960 to 1995, turned from anti-war
activist to defense budget booster in the early 70s. He gave the
following explanation in 1979: “American support for Israel
depended upon continued American involvement in international
affairs—from which it followed that an American withdrawal into the
kind of isolationist mood [. . .] that now looked as though it might
soon prevail again, represented a direct threat to the security of
Israel.” (Breaking Ranks, p. 336). Leading the U.S. into war
for the benefit of Israel is the essence of the Machiavellian
crypto-Zionists known deceptively as neoconservatives.

The
Project for a new (((American))) Century

The
story of how the neoconservatives reached the position of influence
they held under George W. Bush is a complicated one, which I can only
outline. They entered the state apparatus for the first time in the
baggage of Rumsfeld and Cheney, during president Ford’s cabinet
reshuffle known as the “Halloween Massacre,” following Nixon’s
resignation. When the Cold War calmed down after America evacuated
its troops from Vietnam in 1973, and the CIA produced reassuring
analyses of the USSR’s military capabilities and ambitions,
Rumsfeld (as Secretary of Defense) and Cheney (as Chief of Staff)
persuaded Ford to appoint an independent committee, known as Team B,
to revise upward the CIA estimates of the Soviet threat, and
reactivate a war attitude in public opinion, Congress, and
Administration. Team B was chaired by Richard Pipes and co-chaired by
Paul Wolfowitz, both introduced by Richard Perle.

During
the Democratic parenthesis of the Carter presidency (1976–80), the
neoconservatives worked at unifying the largest number of Jews around
their policies, by founding the Jewish Institute for National
Security Affairs (JINSA), which became the second-most powerful
pro-Israel lobby after AIPAC. According to its “mission
statement”
, it is “dedicated to educating Congressional,
military and civilian national security decision-makers on American
defense and strategic interests, primarily in the Middle East, the
cornerstone of which is a robust U.S.-Israeli security cooperation.”
In 1980, the neocons were rewarded by Ronald Reagan for their support
by a dozen posts in national security and foreign policy: Richard
Perle and Douglas Feith to the Department of Defense; Richard Pipes
at the National Security Council; Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis “Scooter”
Libby, and Michael Ledeen in the State Department. They helped Reagan
escalate the Cold War, showering billions of dollars on the
military-industrial complex.

The
long term planning of 9/11 probably started then. Isser Harel,
founder of Israeli secret services (Shai in 1944, Shin Bet
in 1948, Mossad until 1963) is reported as prophesizing in 1980, in
an interview with Christian Zionist Michael Evans, that Islamic
terrorism would end up hitting America in their “phallic symbol”:
“Your biggest phallic symbol is New York City and your tallest
building will be the phallic symbol they will hit”.[10]  (A
whole article would be needed to document and explain the revival of
the Jewish gift of apocalyptic prophecy in recent decades.)

In
1996, during the Clinton years, the neoconservatives threw all their
weight into their ultimate think tank, the Project for the New
American Century (PNAC), directed by William Kristol and Robert
Kagan. PNAC recommended taking advantage of the defeat of communism
to reinforce American hegemony by preventing the emergence of any
rival. Their
Statement
of Principles
vowed
to extend the current
Pax
Americana
,
which entailed “a military that is strong and ready to meet both
present and future challenges.” In its September 2000 report
entitled
Rebuilding
America’s Defenses
,
PNAC anticipated that US forces must become “able to rapidly deploy
and win multiple simultaneous large-scale wars.” This required a
profound transformation, including the development of “a new family
of nuclear weapons designed to address new sets of military
requirements.” Unfortunately, according to the authors of the
report, “the process of transformation […] is likely to be a long
one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl
Harbor.” It is certainly no coincidence that the three-hour-long
blockbuster
Pearl
Harbor
was
released in the summer 2001, conveniently entrenching the “New
Pearl Harbor” meme into the minds of millions.

PNAC’s
architects played the American hegemony card by draping themselves in
the super-patriotic discourse of America’s civilizing mission. But
their duplicity is exposed in a document brought to public knowledge
in 2008: a report published in 1996 by the Israeli think tank
Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS),
entitled
A
Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm
,
written
specifically for the new Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
The team responsible for the report was led by Richard Perle, and
included Douglas Feith and David Wurmser, who figured the same year
among the signatories of PNAC. As its title suggests, the
Clean
Break

report invited Netanyahu to break with the Oslo Accords of 1993,
which officially committed Israel to the return of the territories it
occupied illegally since 1967. The new prime minister should instead
“engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism” and reaffirm
Israel’s right to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

In
November 2000, Bush Jr. was elected under conditions that raised
protests of electoral fraud. Dick Cheney, who had directed his
campaign, named himself vice-president and introduced two dozens
neoconservatives in foreign policy key positions. The State
Department was entrusted to Colin Powell, but he was surrounded with
neocon aides such as David Wurmser. As National Security Adviser,
Condoleezza Rice, a specialist of Russia with no expertise in the
Middle East, was entirely dependent on her neocon adviser Philip
Zelikow. William Luti and Elliott Abrams, and later Eliot Cohen, were
also tasked with steering Rice. But it was mainly from within the
Defense Department under Donald Rumsfeld that the most influential
neocons were able to fashion US foreign and military policy. Richard
Perle occupied the crucial position of director of the Defense Policy
Board, responsible for defining military strategy, while Paul
Wolfowitz became the “soul of the Pentagon” as deputy secretary
with Douglas Feith as under secretary.

The
Hanukkah miracle to start WWIV

After
eight months in the presidency, Bush was confronted with the
“catastrophic event,” the “new Pearl Harbor” that PNAC had
wished for a year earlier. 9/11 was a real “Hanukkah
miracle”
for Israel, commented Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy and
Israeli National Security Council chairman Uzi Dayan. Netanyahu
rejoiced: “It’s very good
[…] it will generate immediate
sympathy […], strengthen the bond between our two peoples, because
we’ve experienced terror over so many decades, but the United
States has now experienced a massive hemorrhaging of terror.” On
September 21, he published an op-ed in the
New
York Post

entitled “Today, We Are All Americans,” in which he delivered his
favorite propaganda line: “For the bin Ladens of the world, Israel
is merely a sideshow. America is the target.” 

Three days later the
New
Republic

responded with a headline on behalf of the Americans: “We are all
Israelis now.” Americans experienced 9/11 as an act of hatred from
the Arab world, and they felt an immediate sympathy for Israel, which
the neoconservatives relentlessly exploited. One of the aims was to
encourage Americans to view Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians
as part of the global fight against Islamic terrorism.

It
was a great success. In the years preceding September 11, Israel’s
reputation had bottomed out; condemnations had been raining from
around the world for its policy of apartheid and colonization, and
its systematic war against Palestinian command structures. Increasing
numbers of American voices questioned the merits of the special
relationship between the United States and Israel. From the day of
the attacks, it was all over. As Americans now intended to fight Arab
terrorists to the death, they would stop demanding from Israel more
reasonable, proportionate retaliation against Palestinian suicide
bombers and rockets.

Instead,
the president’s speeches (written by neocon David Frum)
characterized the 9/11 attacks as the trigger for a world war of a
new type, one fought against an invisible enemy scattered throughout
the Middle East. First, vengeance must come not only against bin
Laden, but also against the state harboring him: “We will make no
distinction between those who committed these acts and those who
harbor them” (Sept. 11). Second, the war extends to the world: “Our
war on terror begins with Al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It
will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been
found, stopped and defeated” (Sept. 20). Third, any country that
does not support Washington will be treated as an enemy: “Either
you are with us, or you are with the terrorists” (Sept. 20).

In
an article in the Wall Street Journal dated November 20, 2001,
the neoconservative Eliot Cohen dubbed the war against terrorism as
“World War IV,” a framing soon echoed by other American Zionists
(the odd choice of the name WWIV rather than WWIII comes, I suspect,
from the neocons’ ethnocentric worldview, in which every world war
is a step toward Greater Israel; since one major step was
accomplished in 1967, the Cold War counts as WW3). In September 2004,
at a conference in Washington entitled “World War IV: Why We Fight,
Whom We Fight, How We Fight,” Cohen said: “The enemy in this war
is not ‘terrorism’ […] but militant Islam.” Like the Cold
War, the imminent world war, according to Cohen’s vision, has
ideological roots, will have global implications, and will last a
long time, involving a whole range of conflicts. The self-fulfilling
prophecy of a new World War centered in the Middle East has also been
popularized by Norman Podhoretz, in “How to Win World War IV”
(Commentary, February 2002), followed by a second article in,
“World War IV: How It Started, What It Means, and Why We Have to
Win,” (September 2004), and finally a book titled World War IV:
The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism
(2007).[11]

The
hijacked conspiracy and the controlled opposition

In
the case of 9/11 as in the case of Kennedy, controlled opposition
operates on many levels, and many honest scholars now realize that
the 9/11 Truth movement itself is partly channeled by individuals and
groups secretly aiming at drawing suspicions away from Israel. Such
is certainly the case of the three young Jews (Avery, Rowe, and
Bermas) who directed the film
Loose
Change

(2005), the most widely watched 9/11 conspiracy film since its first
version in 2005. They hitched their whole thesis on a comparison with
the never carried-out false flag project Operation Northwoods (timely
revealed to the public in May 2001 in James
Bamford
’s book
Body
of Secrets
,
written with the support of former NSA director Michael Hayden, now
working for Michael Chertoff), but they failed to mention the attack
on the USS Liberty, a well-documented false flag attack by Israel on
its U.S. ally. 

They did not breathe a word about the
neoconservatives’ loyalty to Israel, and treat anyone who cited the
Israeli role in 9/11 as anti-Semitic. The same can be said of
Bermas’s more recent film
Invisible
Empire
(2010),
also produced by Alex Jones: a compilation of anti-imperialist
clichés focusing on the Bushs and the Rockefellers, without a single
hint of the (((Others))).

It
is interesting to note that the 9/11 scenario put forward by
Loose
Change

had actually been prewritten by Hollywood: on the 4
th
of March, 2001, Fox
TV broadcast the first episode of the series
The
Lone Gunmen
,
watched
by 13 million Americans. The plot is about computer hackers working
for a secret cabal within the U.S. government, who hijack a jet by
remote control with the intent to crash it into one of the Twin
Towers, while making it appear to have been hijacked by Islamic
terrorists. At the last seconds, the pilots manage to regain control
of the plane. The purpose of the failed operation was to trigger a
world war under the pretext of fighting terrorism. Truthers of the
“inside job” school fancy that this episode must have been
written by some whistleblower inside Fox. Unlikely!

There
is, of course, some truth in the “inside job” theory, as I said
at the beginning. Israel (in the wider sense) would not be able to
pull such an operation and get away with it, without complicity at
the highest level of U.S. government. How does that work? Pretty much
like for the Kennedy
assassination
, if you consider that the country was then ruled by
its vice-president Dick Cheney, the president being a mere dummy (see
Lou Dubose and Jake Bernstein,
Vice:
Dick Cheney and the Hijacking of the American Presidency,
Random
House, 2006). In my book
JFK-9/11,
I have proposed a plausible scenario of how Israel had in fact
hijacked a smaller false flag attack on the Pentagon fabricated by
the American Deep State, for the limited purpose of justifying the
overthrow of the Talibans in Afghanistan, a goal fully supported by
such “Great Gamers” as Zbigniew Brzezinski, but which didn’t in
itself interest the neocons.

What
the neocons wanted was a new war against Iraq and then a general
conflagration in the Middle East leading to the crumbling of all the
enemies of Israel, with Syria and Iran high on the list. So they
outbid everyone and gave the operation the scale they wanted with the
help of their New York super-sayan Silvertein. George W. Bush,
Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, and other goyim who had been kept out
of the loop, finding themselves embroiled in geopolitical
machinations of global scope, could merely try to save face. On
September 19 and 20, Richard Perle’s Defense Policy Board met in
the company of Paul Wolfowitz and Bernard Lewis (inventor of the
self-fulfilling prophecy of the “clash of civilizations”) but in
the absence of Powell and Rice. They prepared a letter to Bush,
written on PNAC letterhead, to remind him of his historic mission:
“Even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any
strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must
include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in
Iraq. Failure to undertake such an effort will constitute an early
and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international
terrorism.” [12] This was an ultimatum. Bush was certainly aware of
the leverage that the neocons had acquired over the major print and
television media. He was obliged, under penalty of ending in the
proverbial trash bin of history, to endorse the invasion of Iraq that
his father had refused the Zionists ten years earlier.

As
for Brzezinski and other genuine U.S. imperialists, their support for
the invasion of Afghanistan made their timid protests against the
Iraq war ineffective. It was a little late in February 2007 when
Brzezinski denounced before the Senate “a historical, strategic and
moral calamity […] driven by Manichaean impulses and imperial
hubris.” In 2012 he declared, regarding the risk of conflagration
with Iran, that Obama should stop
following Israel like a “stupid mule.”
He soon disappeared
from the MSM, as a useful idiot no longer useful.

The
“half truth” of the exclusively “inside job” theory, which
denounces 9/11 as a false flag operation perpetrated by the American
state on its own citizens, functions like a secondary false flag
hiding the real masters of the operation, who are in fact agents in
the service of a foreign nation. One of the aims of this
inside-jobish controlled opposition is to force American officials to
maintain the “bin Laden did it” masquerade, knowing that tearing
apart the fake Islamic flag would only reveal the U.S. flag, not the
Israeli flag. No longer controlling the media, they would not have
the means to raise this second veil to expose Israel. Any effort to
get at the truth would be political suicide. Everyone understands
what is at stake: if one day, under mounting pressure from public
opinion or for some other strategic reason, the mainstream media
abandons the official bin Laden story, the well-rehearsed slogan
“9/11 was an inside job” will have prepared Americans to turn
against their own government, while the neocon Zionists will remain
untouchable (Machiavelli’s method: make another accomplish your
dirty ends, then turn popular vengeance against him). And God knows
what will happen, if the government has not by then succeeded in
disarming its citizens through Sandy Hook-type psy-ops. Government
officials have little choice but to stick to the Al-Qaeda story, at
least for the next fifty years.

After
reaching this conclusion in
JFK-9/11,
I had the satisfaction of finding that Victor Thorn, in a book that
had eluded me (
Made
in Israel: 9-11 and the Jewish Plot Against America,
Sisyphus
Press, 2011
), had already expressed it in harsher terms: “In
essence, the ‘9-11 truth movement’ was created
prior
to
Sept. 11, 2001 as a means of suppressing news relating to Israeli
complicity. By 2002–2003, ‘truthers’ began appearing at rallies
holding placards that read ‘9-11 was an inside job.’ Initially,
these signs provided hope for those who didn’t believe the
government and mainstream media’s absurd cover stories. But then an
awful realization emerged: The slogan ‘9-11 was an inside job’
was quite possibly the greatest example of Israeli propaganda ever
devised. […] The mantra, ‘9-11 was an inside job’ is only
partially true and is inherently damaging to the ‘truth movement’
because it shifts all attention away from Israel’s traitorous
assault against America. […] Leaders of these fake 9-11 groups know
the truth about Israel’s 9-11 barbarity. Their willingness to
perpetuate or cover it up ultimately makes them as guilty and vile as
those who launched the attacks. 

There are no degrees of separation in
this matter. It’s a black-and-white issue. Tell the entire truth
about Israel’s Murder, Inc. cabal, or sleep in the same infected
bed as these murdering dogs lie in. […] Faux conspiratologists
complain about the government and news sources not telling the truth,
yet they’ve erected an utter blackout on data regarding Israel and
9-11.”

The
missing .3 trillion

Some
readers will complain that I am making a very complex operation
appear too simple. I plead guilty: I have merely tried here to
outline the case against Israel in the short scope of an article. But
I am fully aware that creating Greater Israel through a world war
fought by the U.S. might not have been the only consideration in the
preparation of 9/11. Many private interests had to be involved. Yet I
believe none of them interfered with Israel’s plan, and most of
them supported it.

There
is, for example, the missing
gold in the WTC basement
: $200 million were recovered from the
estimated $1 billion stored: who took the rest? But that is nothing
compared to the $2.3 trillion that were missing from the accounts of
the Department of Defense for the year 2000, in addition to $1.1
trillion missing for 1999, according to a televised declaration made
on September 10
th,
2001, the day before the attacks, by Donald Rumsfeld. Just for
comparison, this is more than one thousand times the colossal losses
of Enron, which triggered a chain of bankruptcies that same year. All
this money evaporated into thin air under the watch of William Cohen,
Defense Secretary during Bill Clinton’s second term. In 2001, the
man who was tasked to help track down the missing trillions was Under
Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) Dov Zakheim, a member of PNAC and
an ordained rabbi. 

Practically, the mystery had to be resolved by
financial analysts at Resource Services Washington (RSW).
Unfortunately, their offices were destroyed by “al-Qaeda” the
following morning. The “hijackers” or Flight AA77, rather than
hitting the command center on the eastern side of the Pentagon, chose
to attempt a theoretically impossible downward spiral at 180 degrees
in order to hit the west side of the building precisely at the
location of the accounting offices. The 34 experts at RSW perished in
their offices, together with 12 other financial analysts, as is noted
in the biography of the team leader Robert Russell for the National
9/11 Pentagon Memorial
: “The weekend before his death, his
entire office attended a crab feast at the Russell home. They were
celebrating the end of the fiscal-year budget completion. Tragically,
every person that attended that party was involved in the Pentagon
explosion, and are currently missing”.

By
an incredible coincidence, one of the financial experts trying to
make sense of the Pentagon financial loss, Bryan Jack, was reported
to have died at the precise location of his office, not because he
was working there that day, but because he was on a business trip on
Flight AA77. In the words of the
Washington
Post

database
: “Bryan C. Jack was responsible for crunching
America’s defense budget. He was a passenger on American Airlines
Flight 77, bound for official business in California when his plane
struck the Pentagon, where, on any other day, Jack would have been at
work at his computer”. Yahweh must have a sense of chutzpah! 

Laurent
Guyénot is the author of JFK-9/11:
50 years of Deep State, Progressive Press, 2014
, and From
Yahweh to Zion: Jealous God, Chosen People, Promised Land … Clash
of Civilizations
, 2018. (or $30 shipping included from Sifting
and Winnowing, POB 221, Lone Rock, WI 53556). –
Source

Footnotes

[1]
Philippe Broussard, “En dépit des déclarations américaines, les
indices menant à Ben Laden restent minces,” Le Monde, September
25, 2001.

[2] Gilad Atzmon, Being in Time: a Post-Political
Manifesto, Interlink Publishing, 2017 , p. 142.

[3] David Ray
Griffin, 9/11 Contradictions, Arris Books, 2008, pp. 170-182; Webster
Griffin Tarpley, 9/11 Synthetic Terror Made in USA, Progressive
Press, 2008, pp. 321-324.

[4] Christopher Bollyn, Solving
9-11: The Deception That Changed the World, C. Bollyn, 2012, pp.
278–280.

[5] It is quoted here from Bollyn’s book and from
Justin Raimondo, The Terror Enigma: 9/11 and the Israeli Connection,
iUniverse, 2003.

[6] Christopher Bollyn, Solving 9-11: The
Deception That Changed the World, C. Bollyn, 2012, p. 159.

[7]
Justin Raimondo, The Terror Enigma: 9/11 and the Israeli Connection,
iUniverse, 2003, p. 3.

[8] Christopher Bollyn, Solving 9-11:
The Deception that Changed the World, 2012 , pp. 278-280.

[9]
Quoted by Andrew Cockburn, who claims to have heard the anecdote from
“friends of the family”, in Rumsfeld: His Rise, His fall, and
Catastrophic Legacy, Scribner, 2011, p. 219.

[10] Michael
Evans told of this prophecy in an interview with Deborath Calwell and
in his book The American Prophecies, Terrorism and Mid-East Conflict
Reveal a Nation’s Destiny), quoted in Christopher Bollyn, Solving
9-11: The Deception That Changed the World, C. Bollyn, 2012, p.
71.

[11] Stephen Sniegoski, The Transparent Cabal: The
Neoconservative Agenda, War in the Middle East, and the National
Interest of Israel, Enigma Edition, 2008, p. 193.

[12] Stephen
Sniegoski, The Transparent Cabal: The Neoconservative Agenda, War in
the Middle East, and the National Interest of Israel, Enigma Edition,
2008, p. 144.

Zie
ook de reacties onder
het artikel van ICH.

*  Zie: ‘Tell Congress: Stop the Patriot Act!‘ >>de volgende tekst is een deel van het schrijven bij deze petitie: A federal judge ruled that
all the government spying that Edward Snowden revealed back in 2013
was illegal.1

But that doesn’t mean the NSA,
FBI, and other Trump-controlled intelligence agencies will suddenly
stop spying on Americans’ phone records, internet searches, and web
browser history. Far from it.

Congress could still
legalize spying on US citizens without a warrant.

They could do it anytime between now and the end of the year, unless
you speak up and stop them.

Sign
the petition: Stop the Patriot Act! Don’t reauthorize spying on
Americans without a warrant!

** Waarbij gebouw 7 van het WTC al niet kan zijn ingestort als reactie op het instorten van de torens……

Voor meer berichten over 9/11 (en dat zijn er heel wat) klik op het label 911, direct onder dit bericht.

Mijn excuus, maar vanwege het beperkte aantal labels dat je mag gebruiken in blogger, ontbreken er wel ‘een paar’ belangrijke labels. (maar nogmaals: door te klikken op 911 zie je genoeg berichten waarin je de belangrijkste figuren en labels ‘tegenkomt’, waarvan er een aantal in het bovenstaande artikel worden genoemd)

9/11 voorkennis verzwegen in officiële rapporten

Tijdens en vlak na de
Twin Towers aanslagen, werden een aantal Israëlische mannen
gearresteerd die feestvierden met de WTC ramp op de achtergrond. Het
was duidelijk dat ze feestvierden n.a.v. de aanvallen op de Twin
Towers….. Volgens eigen zeggen waren zij Mossad agenten die werden
uitgezonden om de vernieling van het WTC te filmen, zo verklaarden ze
later op de Israëlische tv…… Zonder enig onderzoek werden de
mannen vrijgelaten en mochten ze zelfs terugreizen naar Israël…….

Paul
Craig Roberts, de schrijver van het 
Information Clearing House artikel dat hieronder is opgenomen, schrijft verder over de ‘daders’
en haalt intussen al bekende zaken aan, als dat deze daders
onmogelijk de vliegtuigen in de Twin Towers kunnen hebben gevlogen,
een zaak die zelfs geroutineerde piloten naar eigen zeggen niet
kunnen (de daders zouden een paar vlieglessen hebben gehad in kleine
vliegtuigjes). Het is dan ook duidelijk dat de zogenaamde daders
werden begeleid door of geheime diensten van de VS en/of Israël, dit
om de false flag operatie, die 9/11 was, te verhullen…. Overigens werden de vliegtuigen volgens een aantal deskundigen op afstand bediend….

Ook
genoemd door Roberts de aanval op het Pentagon, daar moeten diverse
camera’s beelden hebben opgenomen van wat er werkelijk gebeurde, deze beelden
worden al 18 jaar lang door de FBI afgeschermd voor het publiek en de
politiek. Iedereen met meer dan 2 hersencellen kan zien dat er nooit
een vliegtuig in het Pentagon kan zijn gevlogen, daarvoor was de
schade veel te gering (en dat is nog maar 1 van de redenen die
aangeven dat het geen vliegtuig kan zijn geweest, maar waarschijnlijk
een raket van de VS…..)

Nog een
vreemde zaak, de telefoontjes uit het vliegtuig dat in
Pennsylvania zou zijn neergestort: in die tijd was het nog
onmogelijk om met een mobiele telefoon vanuit een vliegtuig te bellen met het
thuisfront…

Roberts betoogt terecht dat wanneer een handjevol terroristen de VS zo hebben kunnen misleiden (als men het publiek wil doen geloven), Rusland zelfs al ten tijde van de Sovjet-Unie de VS en West-Europa zonder veel moeite kon hebben weggevaagd……

Zoals dik is bewezen sinds 11 september 2001 is het neerhalen van de Twin Towers middels vliegtuigen een onmogelijke zaak, daarnaast hebben deskundigen de resten van heftige springstoffen teruggevonden in de puinhopen van 9/11…… 

Hoeveel bewijs heb je nog nodig om in te zien dat 9/11 een door de VS overheid gecontroleerde aanslag was…… Roberts noemt nog een aantal zaken, die duidelijk maken dat 9/11 een door de VS (waarschijnlijk met hulp van Israël) opgezette zaak is….. Bush en Cheney zouden hebben geweigerd te getuigen voor de 9/11 commissie…… De leidende figuren van deze commissie stellen zelfs dat ze tot bepaalde zaken geen toegang hadden, dat men werd voorgelogen en dat het de opzet was dat de commissie zou falen……

Het gaat zelfs zover dat de VS overheid zelf de leugen heeft gelanceerd dat de gebouwen door een kernwapen dan wel een gericht-energiewapen (o.a. laser en deeltjesstralen) werden neergehaald om degenen die niet geloven in de officiële lezing in een belachelijk daglicht te stellen en daarmee de aandacht af te leiden van de werkelijke reden van instorting van de gebouwen…… 

Lees het
volgende artikel en zegt het voort! De aanslagen zijn nu 18 jaar
geleden, daarbij kwamen volgens zeggen 3.000 mensen om het leven,
als reactie daarop heeft de VS alleen in Irak al meer dan 1,5 miljoen
mensen vermoord (met hulp van andere NAVO-lidstaten), in Afghanistan
zouden dit er rond de 500.000 zijn (al houdt het westen veel lagere
aantallen aan….). Als reactie daarop hebben we ‘islamterreur’ op de
straten van Europa en zijn er enorme vluchtelingenstromen
opgang gekomen, voorts zijn onze privacyrechten zo goed als helemaal
uitgekleed (al is dat laatste ook de duidelijke opzet van de 9/11
aanvallen, zie de bevoegdheden en de enorme geldstromen die de geheime diensten erbij kregen na 9/11…..)

Some
of the Many Things Most Americans Never Heard About 9/11

By
Paul Craig Roberts

September
14, 2019 “
Information
Clearing House

– The “Dancing Israelis” who turned out to be Israeli Mossad
agents caught filming and celebrating the destruction of the twin
towers. Arrested by police and released without investigation, they
were not mentioned in the 911 Commission Report.  Later on
Israeli TV they said they were sent to New York to film the
destruction of the twin towers.  Allegedly, there was no
advance warning of the event, but obviously the Israelis knew.  


The
alleged fundamentalist orthodox fanatical Muslims who were prepared
to die to be martyrs, but who drank, drugged, and lived with
strippers and prostitutes in Florida. They were the patsies paraded
through flight schools and left a highly visible public record.  They
all flunked out and could not even fly small planes, but performed
miraculous flight feats in their attacks on the WTC towers and
Pentagon that military and civilian airline pilots say are beyond
their own skills.  These Saudi Arabians were being operated
by US or Israeli intelligence to create a record to serve as a
parallel patsy operation that could be used to cover up the false
flag attack.


Numerous
video cameras recorded whatever exploded at the Pentagon, but the FBI
has refused to release them for 18 years. Clearly, the videos do not
support the official story.


About
half of the alleged hijackers have been found alive and well and deny
that they had ever left their countries.  


In
2001 no cell phone calls were possible from aircraft at the altitudes
from which calls were reported. 


The
airliners that allegedly hit the twin towers were flimsy compared to
the steel and concrete of the towers.  The airliners would
have smashed against the structure and fallen to the street below.


Pre-knowledge
of 9/11 was widespread.  The stocks of the two allegedly
hijacked airlines were sold short prior to the event, resulting in
large profits when the stocks fell in response to the hijackings. The
short-sellers were swept under the carpet and not investigated.

FBI
director Robert Mueller was instrumental in covering up for the false
official story of 9/11, a story that has zero evidence in its behalf.

If
a handful of young men with no intelligence service or government
support can defeat the entire national security state of the United
States and all of its NATO and Israeli allies and successfully attack
with devastating results both New York and the Pentagon itself—the
very symbol of American military supremacy—the Soviet Union could
have wiped out the US and all of Europe without detection.  Don’t
you wonder how we survived the Soviet Union when the “Great
American Superpower” was so easily defeated by a handful of young
Saudi Arabians?


Four
hijacked airliners are alleged hijacked, all at airports served by an
Israeli security company. 

All four airliners allegedly crash.  Two
into the WTC towers, one into a field in Pennsylvania, and one into
the Pentagon.  Yet no airliner debris exists.  The
Pentagon’s lawn is not even scratched.

The
President of the United States refuses to testify before the 9/11
Commission unless he is accompanied by his handler, Vice President
Cheney.  Both refuse to testify under oath. The 9/11
Commission is oh-so-respectful to the distinguished president and
vice president.


One
member of the 9/11 Commission, a US Senator, resigned from the
Commission, saying that “the fix is in.”  After the
Commission report was issued, the Commission chairman, vice chairman,
and legal counsel wrote books in which they said that information was
withheld from the Commission, that the Commission was lied to and
considered referring the false testimony to the Justice (sic)
Department for prosecution, and that “the Commission was set up to
fail.”  And not a peep from the controlled pressitute
media whose only function is to deliver the controlled explanations
that the ruling oligarchs want planted into Americans’ minds.


Tenants
of the WTC buildings reported constant noises, floors sealed off,
service disruptions and that the excuse was the installation of fiber
optic cable. If the buildings faced condemnation as reported because
of asbestos fireproofing, who would go to the expense of installing
fiber optic cable to upgrade the Internet capability of condemned
buildings?


Scientists
have found reacted and unreacted nano-thermite and other elements
used in controlled demolition.  They have proved the
existence of these elements.  They have samples from the
WTC dust left which they have offered to scientists and governments
for testing in order to prove or disprove their own findings.  No
takers.


Instead,
we have the appearance of nonsensical claims that the WTC buildings
were brought down by a directed energy weapon and by nuclear
bombs.  These are preposterous allegations, the purpose of
which is the deliberate creation of disinformation in order to focus
attention away from the false official story and bury it in
disagreements about what caused the buildings to fail.

I
have checked with weapons specialists who are critics of US
government foreign policy and who monitor every development in weapon
systems in the US and Russia. This is what they tell me:  “I
can confidently state that no direct energy weapon, capable of
demolishing such a structure at the Twin Towers, existed in 2001, nor
does it exist today.”


Another
reported that there are lab tests of directed energy in Russia but no
deployed weapon. He suggested that people who believe in this fantasy
story should explain the safe source of high energy that the alleged
weapon used, and how it was moved on site and removed without
detection.  Moreover, a directed energy burst would show on
detectors which monitor the electromagnetic spectrum.  No
such evidence exists. Since no such weapon has ever been tested to
bring down skyscrapers, why would the government take the risk of
using such a weapon for the first time in a public scenario where who
knows what could go wrong and explanations would have to be
given?  And why reveal to foreign powers the existence of
such a weapon?  Controlled demolition is an old and
familiar technology that works.  And it did.

I
could go on and on.  


As
I wrote in a previous column, when Americans fell for the 9/11
deception, they lost their country, and peoples in seven countries
lost their lives, limbs, and families.


Dr.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for
Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He
was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and
Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His
internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts’
latest books are 
The
Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the
West
How
America Was Lost
,
and 
The
Neoconservative Threat to World Order
.

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

Zie ook:

9/11 en de voorkennis van de aanslagen in de VS

9/11: New Yorkse brandweercommandanten vragen een nieuw onderzoek naar de aanslagen op het het WTC in 2001

9/11 No Question, It Was Controlled Demolition

9/11: de teller voor het aantal door VS/NAVO gedode mensen staat intussen op meer dan 2,5 miljoen

SPECIAL REPORT – More Censored 9/11 History

First The Explosion And Then The “Planes”

9/11 “The Palestinians cheered” hoax

9/11 Wiring The Buildings

MIKE PENCE – FAKE ANTHRAX VICTIM?:

THE CIA-VISA FRAUD THAT PRECEDED 9/11 (5 min.):

Zie verder over Irak: Misvormde kinderen in Irak door gebruik van verarmd uranium in VS munitie (en zie de andere links in dat bericht naar de oorlog in Irak)

Irak oorlog: 16 jaar na 20 maart 2003 ontkent de perschef van Bush dat er is gelogen om Irak binnen te vallen…..

Het gore
lef wat sommigen hebben is niet zelden ten hemel schreiend, zoals de
perschef van president Bush (deze oorlogsmisdadiger en top-idioot mag zich president blijven noemen). Ari Fleischer (de perschef) nam het besluit e.e.a. via Twitter de wereld in
te helpen, waarschijnlijk als reactie op de dreigementen van de VS
tegen het Internationaal Strafhof dat men actie zal nemen tegen de
functionarissen, die zich bezig houden met onderzoek naar VS
oorlogsmisdaden…….

Ongelofelijk wat ploert Fleischer durft te zeggen, terwijl de hele wereld weet (of kan weten) dat de
VS heeft gelogen, leugens die meer dan 2 miljoen Irakezen het leven
heeft gekost, ofwel die mensen zijn in feite vermoord door de
VS……

Fleischer
doet net of de geheime diensten van de VS, Israël en nog een paar
landen zeker wisten dat er massavernietigingswapens lagen in Irak,
weliswaar klopte dit niet, maar dat is iets anders dan liegen, aldus de hufter….. ha!
ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Alsof
die geheime diensten ook maar de neiging hebben om de waarheid te vertellen,
jezus!!

De
wapeninspecteurs van de VN, o.l.v. Blix, hebben uit en te na gewezen op
het feit dat Irak (onder Saddam Hoessein) geen
massavernietigingswapens had en deze zelfs niet voor hen verborgen kon
hebben…..

Overigens liet de Hoop Scheffer, oorlogsmisdadiger van het CDA, vorig jaar weten nog steeds achter de illegale oorlog tegen Irak te staan, ondanks het enorme aantal slachtoffers, een land dat voor een groot deel in puin ligt en waar de oorlog nog lang niet is afgelopen…… Irak, een land waarnaar Nederland vluchtelingen deporteert, rechtstreeks de oorlog in, dit op basis van ambtsberichten van Buitenlandse Zaken, terwijl hetzelfde ministerie nog steeds een negatief reisadvies voor Irak afgeeft….

Caitlin
Johnstone schreef op haar site een uiterst scherp artikel over
deze zaak en laat van Fleischer en anderen geen spaan heel, lezen
mensen, het gaat hier om geschiedvervalsing van de eerste orde, ook
de reguliere (massa-) media doen net of hun neus bloedt als het om de
illegale Irak oorlog gaat, terwijl zij deze oorlog op valse feiten
van A tot Z hebben gepropageerd, waar de kennis over het tegendeel voor het oprapen lag…….. (over het brengen van fake news gesproken….)

On
the Anniversary Of The Iraq Invasion, Bush Press Secretary Claims
Bush Didn’t Lie

by Caitlin
Johnstone

On
the sixteenth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, as the US
government 
threatens
punitive action
 against International
Criminal Court investigators for attempting to look into US war
crimes, former George W Bush administration Press Secretary Ari
Fleischer has decided to 
publish
a Twitter thread
 claiming
that Bush did not lie to the world about Iraq.

Here
is a transcript of the full thread by Fleischer:

The
Iraq war began sixteen years ago tomorrow. There is a myth about the
war that I have been meaning to set straight for years. After no WMDs
were found, the left claimed “Bush lied. People died.” This
accusation itself is a lie. It’s time to put it to rest.
 

The
fact is that President Bush (and I as press secretary) faithfully and
accurately reported to the public what the intelligence community
concluded. The CIA, along with the intelligence services of
Egypt, France, Israel and others concluded that Saddam had WMD. We
all turned out to be wrong. That is very different from lying.
 

After
the war, a bipartisan group was created to determine what went wrong,
particularly why the intelligence community’s conclusions about Iraq
were so different from what was found on the ground after the
war. The group of experts was named the Robb-Silberman
commission. It’s report was issued in March 2005. 
It
can be found in full here
.
Its key finding was that that a “major intelligence failure”
took place. It also stated that no intelligence service was pressured
by the Bush Administration to conclude that Saddam had WMDs.
 

Here
are the key quotes from their report:
 

“Overall
Commission Finding: The Intelligence Community’s performance in
assessing Iraq’s pre-war weapons of mass destruction programs was a
major intelligence failure.
 

Nuclear
Weapons Summary Finding: The Intelligence Community seriously
misjudged the status of Iraq’s alleged nuclear weapons program in the
2002 NIE* and other pre-Iraq war intelligence products. This
misjudgment stemmed chiefly from the Community’s failure to analyze
correctly Iraq’s reasons for attempting to procure high-strength
aluminum tubes.
 

Biological
Warfare Summary Finding: The Intelligence Community seriously
misjudged the status of Iraq’s biological weapons program in the 2002
NIE and other pre-war intelligence products. The primary reason
for this misjudgment was the Intelligence Community’s heavy reliance
on a human source–codenamed ‘Curveball’–whose information later
proved to be unreliable.
 

Chemical
Warfare Summary Finding: The Intelligence Community erred in its 2002
NIE assessment of Iraq’s alleged chemical warfare program. The
Community’s substantial overestimation of Iraq’s chemical warfare
program was due chiefly to flaws in analysis and the paucity of
quality information collected. In the case of Iraq, collectors of
intelligence absorbed the prevailing analytic consensus and tended to
reject or ignore contrary information. The result was ‘tunnel vision’
focusing on the Intelligence Community’s existing assumptions. The
Intelligence Community did not make or change any analytic judgments
in response to political pressure to reach a particular conclusion,
but the pervasive conventional wisdom that Saddam retained WMD
affected the analytic process. The CIA took too long to admit
error in Iraq, and its Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation, and
Arms Control Center actively discouraged analysts from investigating
errors.
 

Finally,
we closely examined the possibility that intelligence analysts were
pressured by policymakers to change their judgments about Iraq’s
nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs. The analysts
who worked Iraqi weapons issues universally agreed that in no
instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of
their analytical judgments.”
 

That
is what the investigators reported, after been given full access to
people throughout the intelligence community. Which leads me to
conclude that there was a liar and his name was Saddam Hussein. He
created an elaborate system of lies to fool western intelligence
services and he succeeded. He wanted us to believe he had WMDs.
 

The
allegaton that “Bush lied. People died” is a liberal myth
created to politically target President Bush. I understand the anger
that was felt after no WMDs were found. But that doesn’t justify
calling the President a liar. I can only hope that serious historians
and other experts do their homework and resist falling for this myth.

Ari Fleischer
@AriFleischer

The Iraq war began sixteen years ago tomorrow. There is a myth about the war that I have been meaning to set straight for years. After no WMDs were found, the left claimed “Bush lied. People died.” This accusation itself is a lie. It’s time to put it to rest.

11.2K

2:44 AM – Mar 20, 2019

Twitter Ads info and privacy


Ari
Fleischer is lying. It is an absolute proven fact that George W Bush
and his administration 
lied
extensively
 about
the degree of certainty in intelligence regarding Saddam Hussein
possessing weapons of mass destruction, having ties to Al Qaeda, and
seeking nuclear weapons, all of which (along with Vice President
Cheney’s claim that the US invaders would be “
greeted
as liberators
“)
proved false. The Bush administration did not know the things they
claimed to know with any degree of certainty, but they claimed that
they were certain in order to manufacture support for war. Claiming
to know something you do not know is lying, especially when it’s to
advance an ulterior motive.

“Evidence
from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by
people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects
terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda,” Bush 
claimed
in January 2003
.
“Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his
hidden
 
weapons
to terrorists, or help them develop their own.”

“Simply
stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass
destruction,” Cheney 
claimed
in August 2002
.
“There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our
friends, against our allies, and against us.”

“The
United States knows that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction,”
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld 
said
in December 2002
.
“Any country on the face of the earth with an active
intelligence program knows that Iraq has weapons of mass
destruction.”

“We
are absolutely sure they have continued to develop weapons of mass
destruction, and we are sure they have in their possession weapons of
mass destruction,” Secretary of State Colin Powell 
said
in December 2002
.

“My
colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources,
solid sources,” Powell told the United Nations Security Council
in his infamous 
Iraq
presentation
 in
February 2003. “These are not assertions. What we’re giving
you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.”

“People
will continue to debate this issue, but there is no doubt in my
mind,” Powell said in the same presentation. “These illicit
procurement efforts show that Saddam Hussein is very much focused on
putting in place the key missing piece from his nuclear weapons
program, the ability to produce fissile material.”

Powell was
not nearly as certain
 as
he claimed to be. None of them were. Facts revealed after the
invasion prove that for all their public claims of complete and total
certainty that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, was aiding and
abetting Al Qaida, and was developing nuclear weapons, behind the
veil of government secrecy there was nothing like certainty at all.

For
starters, Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi, who was cited in Powell’s
presentation and who Fleischer refers to by the code name “Curveball”
in the above thread, 
was
known to have been lying
 about
bioweapons long before the invasion. Despite the confident assertions
made by the Bush administration about Janabi’s claims to the public,
no American personnel were present when he made those claims, and
he 
told
the 
Guardianin
2011
 that
the BND (the German intelligence agency who interrogated him) had
known he was lying all along.

“The
BND [German intelligence] knew in 2000 that I was lying after they
talked to my former boss, Dr Bassil Latif, who told them there were
no mobile bioweapons factories,” Janabi said. “For 18
months after that they left me alone because they knew I was telling
lies even though I never admitted it.

Believe
me, back then, I thought the whole thing was over for me. Then all of
a sudden [in the run up to the 2003 invasion] they came back to me
and started asking for more details about what I had told them. I
still don’t know why the BND then passed on my information to the CIA
and it ended up in Powell’s speech.”

Colonel
Lawrence Wilkerson was Powell’s chief of staff and helped him prepare
his UN presentation on Iraq. When asked on MSNBC if he believed he
was lied to about Janabi following the 2011 revelation,
Wilkerson 
told
Cenk Uygur
 that
“I cannot come to any other conclusion, especially when I have
discovered that no US personnel were present when Curveball was
interrogated by the BND, the German intelligence service. That we
accepted that, that we even had a head of the European division for
the CIA, Tyler Drumheller, who at the last minute during Powell’s
preparation, during my preparation of the secretary, had told both
Tenet and McLaughlin that Curveball might not be reliable. That
information was never relayed to the Secretary of State, or to me. I
have some serious doubts about it now. I think there was some
manipulation of this material, and there was some outright lying.”

When asked
by Uygur
 who
he thought lied to him, Wilkerson said one of WINPAC’s two WMD
experts at the time may have been answering directly to Dick Cheney’s
office.

declassified
report from 2002
 titled Iraq:
Status of WMD Programs 
reveals
that while the Bush administration was making its claims of absolute
certainty regarding the dangers posed by the Iraqi government, behind
the scenes it was damn near the opposite. Some choice excerpts:

Our
assessments rely heavily on analytic assumptions and judgment rather
than hard evidence. 

The evidentiary base is particularly sparse for
Iraqi nuclear programs.”

We
range from 0% to about 75% knowledge on various aspects of their
program.”

“Our
knowledge of the Iraqi (nuclear) weapons program is based
largely—perhaps 90%—on analysis of imprecise intelligence.”

“We
cannot confirm the identity of any Iraqi facilities that produce,
test, fill, or store biological weapons.”

Our
knowledge of what biological weapons the Iraqis are able to
produce is nearly complete. Our knowledge of how and where they
are produced is nearly 90% incomplete.”

We
do not know the status of enrichment capabilities. We do not know
with confidence the location of any nuclear-weapon-related
facilities.”

Please
take a look at this material as to what we don’t know about WMD. It
is big.” (That one was from Rumsfeld.)

We
don’t know with any precision how much we don’t know.”

This
is not the language of certainty. Yet certainty was presented to the
public to manufacture support for a war which murdered a million
Iraqis.

The
2002 
Downing
Street memo
,
made public in 2005, reveals a secret meeting between senior
officials of the British government, intelligence and defense
agencies discussing what they knew about America’s plans for war.
The 
text
of the document
 contains
an assertion by the head of MI6 that Bush had already determined that
the invasion of Iraq would take place, and it was only a matter of
fixing bits of intelligence around a narrative to make the case.

“Military
action was now seen as inevitable,” the document reads. “Bush
wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the
conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were
being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN
route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi
regime’s record. There was little discussion in Washington of the
aftermath after military action.”

“It
seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action,
even if the timing was not yet decided,” the document quotes
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw as saying. “But the case was thin.”

In
2008
hearing before the House Judiciary Committee
,
attorney and author Vincent Bugliosi pointed out that the fact
that Bush lied about Iraq could be proven by the difference between
the classified 2002 National Intelligence Estimate and its
declassified white paper which was made available to the public.
 
The
classified version contained dissents from the consensus and language
which made it clear that the reader was reading assessments and
opinions by the CIA and other intelligence agencies, whereas the
unclassified version saw these things deleted, presenting the
assessments as absolute fact.

“The
evidence that he lied about weapons of mass destruction, by the way,
which is not the basis for this book, are right in front of
me,” 
Bugliosi
said
.
“I have it right here. Here is the evidence. This document here
is the National Intelligence Estimate. I didn’t name it before. I
talked about a classified report. This is it right here. October 1st,
2002, classified NIE report. It is called Iraq’s Continuing
 
Programs
of Weapons of Mass Destruction. In this document right here, the CIA
and 15 other U.S. intelligence agencies use words like this, ‘we
assess that’ or ‘we judge that’ Hussein has weapons of mass
destruction. This document here is the white paper that was given to
you folks here in Congress and the American people. And the words ‘we
assess that’ or ‘we judge that’ were removed, meaning that you folks
here heard a fact, and in fact, it was only an opinion.

“Number
two, on nuclear weapons, this document right here, the classified
report has several important dissents. This document right here, the
white paper that you folks were given and the American people, all of
those dissents were deleted.”

Over
and over and over again we saw the same thing: uncertainty presented
as certainty. Guesses presented as fact. Opinions presented as proof.
That’s a lie. Bush lied. We know this with as much certainty as his
administration was pretending to have in the lead-up to the Iraq
invasion. There was a pre-existing agenda to invade Iraq, and
justifications were advanced to provide an excuse for that invasion
with such extreme aggression that now-National Security Advisor John
Bolton literally 
threatened
to murder an international official’s children
 for
making diplomacy work with Saddam.

Here
are a few more 
courtesy
of 
Vox
:

In
October 2002, Bush said that Saddam Hussein had a 
“massive
stockpile”
 of
biological weapons. But as 
CIA Director
George Tenet
 noted
in early 2004, the CIA had informed policymakers it had “no
specific information on the types or quantities of weapons agent or
stockpiles at Baghdad’s disposal.” The “massive stockpile”
was just literally made up.

In
December 2002, Bush declared, 
“We
do not know whether or not [Iraq] has a nuclear weapon.”
 That
was not what the National Intelligence Estimate said. As Tenet would
later testify, “We said that Saddam did not have a nuclear weapon
and probably would have been unable to make one until 2007 to 2009.”
Bush did know whether or not Iraq had a nuclear weapon — and lied
and said he didn’t know to hype the threat.

On
CNN in September 2002, Condoleezza Rice claimed that aluminum tubes
purchased by Iraq were “only really suited for nuclear weapons
programs.” This was 
precisely
the opposite of what nuclear experts at the Energy Department
 were
saying; they argue that not only was it very possible the tubes were
for nonnuclear purposes but that it was very likely they were too.
Even more dire assessments about the tubes from other agencies were
exaggerated by administration officials — and in any case, the
claim that they’re “only really suited” for nuclear weapons is
just false.

On
numerous occasions, Dick Cheney cited a report that 9/11 conspirator
Mohammed Atta had met in Prague with an Iraqi intelligence officer.
He said this after 
the
CIA and FBI concluded that this meeting never took place
.

More
generally on the question of Iraq and al-Qaeda, on September 18,
2001, Rice 
received
a memo summarizing intelligence on the relationship
,
which concluded there was little evidence of links. Nonetheless Bush
continued to 
claim
that Hussein was “a threat because he’s dealing with
al-Qaeda”
 more
than a year later.
 

In
August 2002, 
Dick
Cheney declared
,
“Simply stated, there’s no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has
weapons of mass destruction.” But as 
Corn
notes
,
at that time there was “no confirmed intelligence at this point
establishing that Saddam had revived a major WMD operation.” Gen.
Anthony Zinni, who had heard the same intelligence and attended
Cheney’s speech, would 
later
say in a documentary
,
“It was a total shock. I couldn’t believe the vice president was
saying this, you know? In doing work with the CIA on Iraq WMD,
through all the briefings I heard at Langley, I never saw one piece
of credible evidence that there was an ongoing program.”

In
2007 General Wesley Clark 
told Democracy
Now
 that
he’d actually been informed of the decision to invade Iraq
immediately after 9/11, while the crosshairs were turning on
Afghanistan and well before the public narrative was being amped up
in demand of an invasion of Iraq. His comments read as follows:

About
ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary
Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to
say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work
for me, and one of the generals called me in.
 

He
said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.”
I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.”
He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.”
This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going
to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He
said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said,
“Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to
al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s
nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with
Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do
about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down
governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you
have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”
 

So
I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were
bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with
Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He
reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said,
“I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the
Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said,
“This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven
countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon,
Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is
it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well,
don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I
said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t
show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”

Iraq,
Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran. If you’ve been
following the behaviors of the US war machine, Iraq won’t be the only
painfully familiar name on that list.

Ari Fleischer
@AriFleischer

It remains important to learn what we’ve attacked and where. How widespread?
In addition to military targets, I hope we targeted Assad’s palace in Damascus. Leave him alive but destroy his prestige. Leave him without a home, as Assad has left millions of Syrians w/o theirs.

1,914

2:12 AM – Apr 14, 2018 · New York, USA

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Ari Fleischer
@AriFleischer

“In the last few months of 2018, Iran officially entered a deep recession.” Time to step up the sanctions… https://en.radiofarda.com/a/iran-official-figures-alarming-unemployment-2019/29698225.html 

941

1:36 PM – Jan 10, 2019

Iran’s Official Figures Indicate Alarming Unemployment Rate Later This Year

The official unemployment rate has reached 27 percent among young Iranians and over 40 percent among university graduates, says Omid Ali Parsai, chairman of the Iranian Statistical Center.

en.radiofarda.com






Ari
Fleischer is a liar. He 
was
in the thick
 of
the Bush administration’s campaign to sell the Iraq war to the
American public, and to this day he 
continues trying to
sell
 them
on 
new
acts
 of depraved
US interventionism
.
He’s just as much a warmongering neocon inside as he was when he was
behind a podium defending Bush’s wars in the press room, so it’s no
wonder he wants to preserve the image of his insatiable death cult.
Fleischer wants to preserve his legacy, yes, but he also wants to
preserve support for the war machine whose feet he worships at, hence
his ham-fisted attempt at narrative manipulation regarding the
unforgivable Iraq invasion.

The
responses to Fleischer’s Twitter thread have been overwhelmingly
negative, though, so it doesn’t look like anyone’s buying it. In our
new political landscape, where the image of George W Bush is
being 
continually
rehabilitated
,
that gives me a bit of hope.

These
monsters lied to start a war which snuffed out a million human lives
and destabilized an entire region, and they did it right in front of
our faces. The fact that they’re now trying to lie about the thing we
all watched them do is as insulting as it is infuriating. Never let
them pull the wool over your eyes, and never forget what they did.
Forgiveness is 
highly
overrated
.

Thanks
for reading! My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you
enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me
on
 Facebook,
following my antics on
 Twitter, throwing
some money into my hat on 
Patreon or Paypalpurchasing
some of my 
sweet
merchandise
, buying
my new book 
Rogue
Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone
,
or my previous book 
Woke:
A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers
.
The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see
the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for
my 
website,
which will get you an email notification for everything I publish.

Bitcoin
donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Caitlin
Johnstone
 |
March 20, 2019 at 3:25 pm | Tags: 
Ari
Fleisher
bushgeorge
w bush
invasioniraqliednewsPoliticswar |
Categories: 
ArticleNews |
URL: 
https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1Bl

* NIE: National Intelligence Estimate

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

Voor meer berichten over de illegale oorlog tegen Irak, klik op het labels Irak, direct onder dit bericht. Let
wel: na een aantal berichten wordt het laatst gelezen bericht telkens
herhaald, dan onder het laatst gelezen bericht even opnieuw op het
gekozen label klikken, enz. enz.

Halliburton en Chevron hebben groot belang bij ‘regime change’ in Venezuela

Naast
een paar grote supermarktketens uit de VS, zijn er nog 2
oliemaatschappijen uit de VS werkzaam in Venezuela, Halliburton en
Chevron, beiden hebben groot belang bij een verandering van regering, waar het gewenste regime er een moet zijn met een neoliberaal fascistische inslag….. Echter ook andere maatschappijen in
de olie-industrie, hebben grote belangen bij een
verandering van regime in Venezuela, waar de olie-industrie nu nog is genationaliseerd….. 

Citgo staat ook achter de coup die de VS middels Guaidó bezig is te plegen in Venezuela, terwijl dat bedrijf een
dochter is van de Venezolaanse oliemaatschappij Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), een
staatsbedrijf…… Te gek voor woorden natuurlijk dat deze firma achter
de wil tot verandering van regeringsideologie staat, zelfs als dit
bedrijf zich niet op Venezolaanse bodem bevindt….. Je snapt dat deze steun vooral is ingegeven om de olie-industrie in Venezuela te privatiseren, zodat de bedrijven weer met megawinsten naar huis kunnen….. 

Bij
zo ongeveer alle directe acties van de VS die erop gericht zijn hen
niet welgevallige regeringen ten val te brengen, dus militair
ingrijpen, worden smerig valse verklaringen afgelegd dat men
democratie en vrijheid wil brengen….. Niet nodig uit te leggen dat
dit eigenlijk nooit lukt, wat wel lukt is het vermoorden van grote aantallen burgers, een land in puin leggen en veelal een land in chaos dompelen (als de VS vertrekt en zelfs als de VS blijft, zie Afghanistan en Irak…..)……

Als
de chaos niet al te groot is, zoals wel het geval met de illegale
oorlog tegen Libië, dus landen als Afghanistan en Irak, beiden
illegaal aangevallen door de VS, hebben bedrijven van de VS voorrang
bij het herstel van de infrastructuur, gebouwen en bij hervatting van de oliewinning….
Zo verdiende Halliburton maar liefst 39.5 miljard dollar aan de
illegale oorlog tegen Irak……

Het
voorgaande, dus de valse grond voor het aanvallen van een land, geldt niet voor Venezuela, openlijk stellen figuren als
Bolton (die eerder achter de couppoging van 2002 tegen Chavez stond)
dat de enorme olievoorraad van dit land een reden is voor militair
ingrijpen door de VS, wat niet wil zeggen dat e.e.a. niet gepaard
gaat met valse aantijgingen aan het adres van de regering die moet
wijken, zoals vermeende mensenrechtenschendingen door dit land, ‘onvrijheid’ en economisch
wanbeleid…..* Terwijl de VS voldoende goede banden onderhoudt met
landen die openlijk schijt hebben aan deze zaken, neem Saoedi-Arabië,
de Golfstaten, Egypte en andere landen die met dictatoriale hand
worden bestuurd
…..

De
couppleger die de VS kocht, Guaidó heeft al voor zijn couppoging aangegeven dat hij
de olie-industrie wil privatiseren……

Overigens heeft de VS nog een andere belangrijke grondstof van Venezuela op het oog: coltan, dat wordt gebruikt bij de vervaardiging van smartphones…….

Lees
het volgende uitgebreide artikel van Whitney Webb, eerder
gepubliceerd op Mintpress News en door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media, waarin hij dieper op deze zaak
ingaat en onder meer aangeeft dat de CIA de partij van Guaidó heeft gesubsidieerd…… Voorts het bericht 
dat Chevron met de door Trump
ingestelde sancties tegen Iran een extra winst behaalde van meer dan
4 miljard dollar……. Moet toegeven dat me dit onwaarschijnlijk
lijkt, immers de sancties tegen Iran, die ook de olie-export van dat
land treft, is iets te kort van kracht om een dergelijke megawinst te
behalen, het lijkt me dan ook eerder een winst die behaald werd met
de eerdere sancties van de VS tegen Iran. Maakt niet uit: het
artikel verliest daarmee niets aan waarde:

These
Are the US Companies Backing the Venezuelan Coup Attempt

February
4, 2019 at 1:09 pm

Written
by 
Whitney
Webb

(MPN— For
much of the past twenty years, critics of U.S. foreign policy have
noted that it is often countries with sizeable oil reserves that most
often find themselves the targets of U.S.-backed “humanitarian”
interventions aimed at “restoring democracy.” Analysis of the
nearly two-decades-long U.S. effort aimed at regime change and
“democracy promotion” in Venezuela has long linked such efforts
to the fact that the South American country has the world’s largest
proven oil reserves.

However,
the current U.S. effort to topple the government led by Chavista
politician Nicolás Maduro has become notable for the openness of the
“coup architects” in admitting that putting American corporations
– Chevron and Halliburton chief among them — in charge of
Venezuelan oil resources is the driving factor behind this aggressive
policy.

Last
week, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) – a key player in the Trump
administration’s push for regime change in Caracas – 
tweeted:

Biggest
[American] buyers of Venezuelan oil are Valero Energy & Chevron.
Refining heavy crude from Venezuela supports great jobs in Gulf
Coast. For the sake of these U.S. workers I hope they will begin
working with administration of President [Juan] Guaidó & cut off
illegitimate Maduro regime.”

In
January, the U.S. government recognized Juan Guaidó of
the 
U.S.-funded
and CIA-linked
 Popular
Will Party as the “legitimate” president of the country.

Marco Rubio

@marcorubio

Biggest buyers of Venezuelan oil are @ValeroEnergy & @Chevron. Refining heavy crude from supports great jobs in Gulf Coast.

For the sake of these U.S. workers I hope they will begin working with administration of President Guaido & cut off illegitimate Maduro regime.


3,093

1:34 PM – Jan 24, 2019

A
few hours after Rubio’s tweet, National Security Adviser John
Bolton — who 
actively
supported
 the
U.S.-backed failed Venezuela coup in 2002 — 
appeared
on 
Fox
News
 and
told host Trish Regan the following: “We’re looking at the oil
assets. That’s the single most important income stream to the
government of Venezuela. We’re looking at what to do to that.”

Though
that was a stunning admission in and of itself, Bolton didn’t stop
there. He continued:

We’re
in conversation with major American companies now that are either in
Venezuela, or in the case of Citgo here in the United States. I think
we’re trying to get to the same end result here…. It will make a
big difference to the United States economically if we could have
American oil companies really invest in and produce the oil
capabilities in Venezuela.”

 

Bolton’s
statements have garnered considerable attention in the alternative
media community for their boldness, since leaked cables and documents
have traditionally been the means through which the actual
motivations of U.S. wars have been revealed. Largely overlooked,
however, is the fact that Bolton stated that the Trump administration
is working closely “with major American companies now that are
either in Venezuela, or in the case of Citgo, here in the United
States.”

Given
that Citgo is largely owned by Venezuela’s state oil company
Petroleos de Venezuela SA (PDVSA), Bolton’s statement reveals that
the corporations backing Washington’s regime-change push are those
currently operating in Venezuela.

At
present, there are only two American major oil and oil service
companies with a significant presence in Venezuela – Chevron and
Halliburton. However, Chevron is by far the leading American investor
in Venezuelan oil projects, with Halliburton having 
written
off
 much
of its remaining business interests in the country just last year —
losing hundreds of millions of dollars as a result.

These
two companies have long been “
historic
partners

and have had a solid business relationship between them for decades.
In addition, both have reaped the benefits of past U.S. interventions
abroad — such as the Iraq War, where the U.S. government “opened”
that country’s nationalized oil industry to American oil companies
with military force.

Now
with Venezuela’s nationalized oil industry in the crosshairs,
Chevron and Halliburton are again set to benefit from Washington’s
regime-change policies abroad. Furthermore, as Bolton’s recent
statements suggest, these companies are also the top corporate
sponsors of the current U.S.-backed coup to topple the government in
Caracas.

Profitable
but not Rockefeller-profitable

Chevron’s
history in Venezuela is long and storied, as its presence in the
country dates back more than a century. Over that time, Chevron’s
presence in Venezuela has remained a constant despite the rule of
drastically different governments, from military dictatorships to the
socialist Chavista movement.

For
much of its history in Venezuela, Chevron has had to deal with the
Venezuelan government’s laws regarding oil production,
particularly 
a
1943 law
 that
held that foreign companies could not make greater profits from oil
than they paid to the Venezuelan state. A few decades later in the
1960s, foreign corporations were made to manage their oil extraction
projects in Venezuela by working closely with the Venezuelan Oil
corporation, which later gave way to the current state oil company
PDVSA, created in 1976. It was around this period that Halliburton
first began work in Venezuela.

However,
foreign corporations — particularly American ones — disliked
having to settle for minority stakes in PDVSA projects and longed for
the early days of Venezuela oil extraction when companies like
Rockefeller-owned Standard Oil made wild profits off their Venezuelan
oil assets.

After
the “apertura petrolera” (or “oil opening” to foreign
investment) in the early 1990s — and especially under the
U.S.-backed government of Rafael Caldera, the president who
immediately preceded Hugo Chávez — it seemed that the
privatization of PDVSA was soon to become a reality and companies
like Chevron, ExxonMobil and Halliburton enjoyed the “golden age”
of American oil interests in Venezuela. However, Caldera’s fall
from grace and the rise of Chavismo quickly shattered this
decades-long dream of U.S. corporations and politicians.

Not
only did Chávez end any possibility of PDVSA’s privatization,
he 
also
weakened
 what
remaining influence transnational oil companies had over the state
oil company. For instance, he appointed independent oil experts to
PDVSA’s board of directors, upending years of precedent where PDVSA
managers with close ties to international companies had been
responsible for controlling the board’s membership.

Chávez
further restricted corporate ownership on some oil projects to 49
percent and fired PDVSA’s then-president, replacing him with a
political ally. These drastic changes, among others, led to a strike
among many long-time PDVSA workers, a strike that immediately
preceded the failed U.S.-backed coup attempt in April 2002.

Following
the coup, Chávez dismantled a joint venture originally established
in 1996 between PDVSA and the Venezuelan subsidiary of the U.S.-based
company SAIC, known as INTESA.

INTESA,
per the agreement, had controlled all of PDVSA’s company data (and
its secrets), which it 
then
fed
 to
the U.S. government and U.S. oil corporations until Chávez destroyed
it. This is hardly surprising given that the managers of SAIC at the
time included two former U.S. secretaries of defense and two former
CIA directors. Though obviously a smart move for Chávez, it weakened
an advantage of U.S. corporations who had inside information on PDVSA
while INTESA was operational.

The
tensions between the Chavista government and the U.S. government
along with U.S. corporations only grew from there before reaching a
crescendo in 2007. That year, Chávez 
announced
a decree
 that
would nationalize the remaining oil extraction sites under foreign
company control, giving PDVSA a minimum 60 percent stake in all of
those ventures. U.S. oil companies ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips left
their Venezuelan operations behind as a result, losing billions in
the process. The president of ExxonMobil at the time was Rex
Tillerson — who would later become President Donald Trump’s first
secretary of state.

Yet,
during this time, Chevron, unique among American oil companies, saw
an opportunity and spent the next several years cultivating close
ties to the Chavista government and Chávez himself.

Through
the efforts of Chevron executive Ali Moshiri, Chevron blazed a new
trail that would later serve as a model for foreign oil companies
seeking to do business in Chavista-led Venezuela. Halliburton and
another U.S.-based oil services company, Schlumberger, also decided
to continue business in Venezuela.

During
this time, the Venezuelan government through PDVSA and
Chevron 
entered
into
 several
joint ventures
,
one of the most important of which became known as Petropiar, which
blends Venezuela’s heavy crude oil with other substances to make it
more easily transportable. However, Chevron — due to Chávez’s
reforms of the oil sector — was forced to settle for minority
stakes in all of these ventures.

Halliburton,
which has historically been a main operator for Chevron-owned oil
fields, again partnered with Chevron’s post-2007 ventures in
Venezuela and 
operates the
Petropiar and Petroboscan oil fields that both have minority Chevron
ownership.

For
years, Chevron’s bet on Chavismo paid off and the profits rolled
in. Moshiri even appeared in public on several occasions with Chávez,
who once even called the Chevron executive “
a
dear friend
.”
However, following Chávez’s death in 2013 and the beginning of the
U.S-backed economic siege of Venezuela soon after — first through
joint oil-price manipulation in cooperation with Saudi Arabia and
then through sanctions — the profits of PDVSA, and thus Chevron,
have fallen dramatically. During this time, Houston-based
Schlumberger drastically 
scaled
back
 its
operations in Venezuela.

Since
then, relations between the Maduro-led government and Chevron have
deteriorated precipitously and now, with the current U.S. coup in
motion, Chevron is poised to turn on the Chavista government with the
hopes that profits will not only improve but exceed what they were
during the heights of the Chevron-Chávez partnership.

Betting
on regime change

As
oil production has lagged and profits have continued to slide,
tensions between Chevron and the Maduro government have grown
dramatically since 2017, when the Maduro-led government 
began
arresting
 employees
of Petropiar — the joint venture between Chevron and PDVSA —
during a controversial corruption probe. For Chevron, the issue
exploded after the Venezuelan government last April 
arrested two
Chevron employees working at Petropiar, who were detained for seven
weeks for their alleged role in fraud. Those tensions — in
combination with worries that Chevron’s Venezuela operations could
become unprofitable in less than five years — resulted in 
a
report
 published
by the 
Wall
Street Journal
 claiming
that Chevron was considering leaving Venezuela entirely.

However,
despite media speculation in the U.S., Chevron denied that it was
planning to leave Venezuela anytime soon, with Clay Neff, Chevron’s
president for Africa and Latin America, 
telling Bloomberg,
“we’re committed to Venezuela and we plan to be there for many
years to come,” and adding that reports that Chevron would soon
leave the country were “not accurate.” “We’ve been in the
country for almost 100 years, we know how to operate, we’re a very
experienced operator and we’re committed to our partner PDVSA,”
Neff declared.

Halliburton’s
activities in Venezuela have also taken a hard hit in recent years,
with the company losing over $1 billion in investments since 2017. In
2017, Halliburton was forced to write off $647 million in Venezuelan
investments and then was forced to sell $312 million more last year —
its last remaining investments. Halliburton’s chief financial
officer, Christopher Weber, 
told
the 
New
York Times
 last
year that “the collapse of the Venezuelan currency and the
worsening political climate,” as well as U.S. sanctions, were
responsible for the decision. Halliburton later said 
in
a statement
 that
it planned on “maintaining its presence in Venezuela and is
carefully managing its go-forward exposure.”

Since
both Halliburton and Chevron announced their plans to “weather the
storm” despite growing tensions, it has become more and more
evident that both companies have found the U.S. government’s
promise of increased control over Venezuela’s oil sector through
privatization much more appealing than facing the prospect of
maneuvering around recently imposed U.S. sanctions on PDVSA — which
have been in the works for months — as well as the prospect of
dwindling profits stemming from the continued decline of the
Venezuelan economy and the degradation of its oil-sector
infrastructure.

This
raises the possibility that Chevron and Halliburton had decided to
ride out the Venezuelan economic crisis and growing tensions with
Maduro because it was betting on an aggressive regime-change policy
toward the country. Indeed, some analysts 
have
stated
 that
planning on the current iteration of regime-change policy in
Venezuela only began this past November, around the same time that
Chevron decided to stick it out despite falling profits.

The
fact that Chevron’s operations in Venezuela are 
expected
to collapse
 in
less than five years, as a result of the country’s oil sector and
larger economic woes, lends further support to the possibility that
Chevron sought to back a Washington-based effort to dramatically
alter the Venezuelan government.

In
Halliburton’s case, the fact that the company has already lost over
a billion dollars in its Venezuelan investments since 2017 offers a
different motive, one that involves not only recouping those losses
but also gaining increased contracts in a post-coup Venezuela.

Halliburton
executives surely remember the 
$39.5
billion
 in
profits they made following the U.S. invasion of Iraq. It is worth
pointing out that, in media reports, Halliburton has stated its
commitment “
to
the market in Venezuela
,”
signaling that it is interested in retaining a role in the country’s
oil sector regardless of who governs it.

It
should then come as no surprise that recent U.S. government sanctions
on Venezuela’s oil sectors included exemptions for both Halliburton
and Chevron. Equally unsurprising is the fact that the U.S.-backed
“president” of Venezuela — Juan Guaidó — has already
signaled his plans to open up Venezuela’s state oil assets to
foreign corporations if he succeeds in ousting Maduro.

According
to 
oil
rating agency S&P Global Platts
,
Guaidó has already made “plans to introduce a new national
hydrocarbons law that establishes flexible fiscal and contractual
terms for projects adapted to oil prices and the oil investment
cycle.” This plan would also create a “new hydrocarbons agency”
that will “offer bidding rounds for projects in natural gas and
conventional, heavy and extra-heavy crude” to international oil
corporations.

The
clear message here is that the U.S.-backed “president” of
Venezuela is already signaling to his Washington backers that he will
quickly privatize Venezuela’s state oil company if he succeeds in
taking power, a move that has long been 
a
key component
 of
the platform of Venezuela’s U.S.-funded opposition, of which Guaidó
is part.

Bolton’s
recent statements have made it clear that Chevron and Halliburton are
set to be the main benefactors of this privatization effort, as both
are heavily invested in Venezuela and Chevron the only U.S. oil
company still active in the country. The historically close
relationship of both companies to the U.S. government, and covert
coordination with the U.S. government in undermining or overthrowing
governments in the recent past, also hint at their likely role in the
current U.S. “meddling” in Venezuela.

Boosting
profits through foreign intervention

If
the U.S. succeeds in ousting Maduro and putting Guaidó in his place,
it will only be the latest example of U.S. government policy that
directly benefits the bottom lines of Chevron and Halliburton. In
Chevron’s case, the company’s growth to become one of the largest
oil companies in the world has consistently been aided by the U.S.
establishment, regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans held
the presidency. Indeed,
 as Seeking
Alpha
 noted
:

Chevron’s
stocks gained a combined 247% under Presidents Reagan and George HW
Bush. Under President George W Bush, its shares rose by 157%.
Meanwhile, Chevron’s shares picked up 222% and 112% under
Presidents Clinton and Obama, respectively.”

Notably,
Chevron has also worked with past U.S. presidents in undermining
democratically-elected governments in order to advance its business
interests, with the most recent example taking place in Haiti. 
Cables
published by WikiLeaks
 showed
that Chevron, in 2006 and 2007, partnered with ExxonMobil and the
U.S. government to undermine the presidency of former Haitian
president René Préval after he forged a deal with Chávez’s
PetroCaribe alliance that allowed Haiti to buy subsidized Venezuelan
oil.

Furthermore,
Chevron also 
benefited
greatly
 from
the U.S. invasion of Iraq and its representatives were among those
who met with then-Vice President Dick Cheney in 2003 to plan Iraq’s
“postwar” — i.e., post-invasion — industry that led Chevron
to acquire ownership of several Iraqi oil fields. Notably, the family
of then-President George W. Bush is one of Chevron’s 
largest
shareholders
.
In addition, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice was 
a
Chevron executive
 throughout
the 1990s, and was in charge of public policy for its board of
directors immediately prior to joining the Bush administration. Rice
even had a Chevron oil tanker named in her honor in 1993.

Though
Chevron greatly benefited from the Bush administration’s
destruction of Iraq, Halliburton came away the biggest winner from
the Iraq war, making 
$39.5
billion
 off
the conflict and its aftermath after being awarded numerous,
lucrative contracts to “rebuild” the country. This outcome is
unsurprising given that Cheney served as the company’s CEO for
decades and retained $34 million in company stock throughout his
tenure as U.S. vice president.

Iraq
had been targeted by the Bush administration soon after Bush came to
power, particularly following the formation of Cheney’s 2001 Energy
Task Force, which called for the privatization of Iraq’s
then-nationalized oil resources and reviewed maps of Iraq’s oil
fields and lists of companies seeking contracts with Baghdad years
before the war officially began.

Investing
in a gung-ho president

Chevron’s
hopes for a continued U.S. government policy that favors its growth
domestically and globally have continued under the Trump
administration and have been visible for some time, as evidenced by
its 
$500,000
donation
 to
Trump’s inaugural committee and their top executive’s praise for
the “pro-business environment” cultivated by the Trump
administration. Indeed, in March 2017, then-Chevron CEO John
Watson 
told CNBC that
he had already met with White House staff on “multiple occasions”
in just the first three months of the administration and had been
“encouraged by those meetings.” “We’ve seen a more
pro-business environment … I think the approach they’re taking
toward business — toward enabling our economy to grow again — is
a real positive,” Watson added.

Halliburton
too has long had high hopes for Trump given that the president 
held
between $50,000 and $100,000
 in
company stock up until December 2016, when he sold his personal
stocks to avoid “conflicts of interest” during his presidency.
However, some of Trump’s earliest policy proposals were described
by the media as 
directly
benefiting
 Halliburton,
including his administration’s push to open more publicly-held
lands in the U.S. to oil drilling.

Furthermore,
the recent scandal that forced Trump’s secretary of the interior,
Ryan Zinke, 
to
resign
 involved
Zinke’s 
alleged
corrupt dealings
 with
Halliburton chairman David Lesar, suggesting that the Trump
administration’s potential for a conflict of interest with
Halliburton did not magically dissipate following Trump’s sale of
his personal investments.

Since
the early days of the administration, both Halliburton and Chevron
have benefited directly from several Trump administration policies,
both foreign and domestic. For instance, Chevron and
Halliburton 
benefited
substantially
 from
the Trump administration’s tax cuts, which were
 recently
found
 to
have had “no major impact” on economic growth or company hiring
practices but instead enabled mega-corporations to 
buy
back stocks en masse
 in
order to increase their companies’ stock prices. After the passage
of those tax cuts, Chevron executives
 urged
governments
 around
the world to implement similar legislation.

In
addition, consider Trump’s 2017 decision to withdraw from the
Extractive Industries

Transparency
Initiative (EITI), which 
Reuters explained
as
 “a
global standard for governments to disclose their revenues from oil,
gas, and mining assets, and for companies to report payments made to
obtain access to publicly owned resources, as well as other
donations.” 
Bloomberg noted at
the time that the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw had
followed “a long lobbying battle waged by the American Petroleum
Institute, Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp.”

The
involvement of top U.S. oil corporations like Chevron in the
administration’s decision to withdraw from the EITI led Corinna
Gilfillan, head of the U.S. Office at NGO Global Witness, to state
that it was “Exxon and Chevron’s preference for secrecy that
[had] made it impossible for the U.S. to comply.” Gilfillan
then 
told Common
Dreams
:

When
major Russian and Chinese oil companies are disclosing more
information about their deals around the world than their
U.S. counterparts, you have got to ask: what are Exxon and
Chevron so desperate to hide?”

However,
Chevron, for its part, has not agreed with every Trump policy, as the
company did lob
considerable
criticism
 at
the Trump administration last June over his imposition of steel
tariffs during the first phase of the ongoing “trade war” with
China. Yet, that criticism disappeared a few months later, when
another Trump policy – his draconian sanctions targeting Iran’s
oil sector – took effect. As
the Washington
Examiner
 noted
 this
past November, Trump’s sanction policy targeting Iranian oil “has
proved a lucrative one for the shareholders who own oil companies
such as ExxonMobil and Chevron,” resulting in a jump for those
companies’ third-quarter earnings “that topped Wall Street
expectations by wide margins.”

The Examiner went
onto note that Trump’s sanctions on Iranian oil exports led
Chevron’s net income to more than double to $4.1 billion, with cash
from operations reaching “the highest it has been in nearly five
years.”

However,
Halliburton’s reaction to Trump’s Iran policy is more mixed,
given its considerable business interests in Iran and the fact that
it 
had
benefited
 from
the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) approved by the previous administration of
Barack Obama. Yet, if the Trump administration’s regime-change
policy targeting Iran succeeds, Halliburton will be among the top
beneficiaries of that policy as well, given its already established
presence in the country.

Now,
with Venezuela’s massive oil resources in the Trump
administration’s crosshairs, Chevron stands to gain once again from
Trump’s foreign policy, which has been guided by oil politics in
several instances.

Trump
ready to test out his “Take the Oil” intervention policy

Though
Trump has yet to make bold, Boltonesque public statements regarding
the clear link between Venezuelan oil and his administration’s
regime-change policy, his past statements regarding U.S.
interventions in oil-rich nations elsewhere show that Trump has long
backed U.S. intervention in foreign nations if it meant that the U.S.
could secure that country’s natural resources, namely oil.

For
instance, in 2011, Trump
 told
the 
Wall
Street Journal
 that
he would support U.S.-backed intervention in Libya if the U.S. could
“take the oil.” In the eight years since the U.S.-backed
intervention, Libya remains without a central government and is now
the site of rampant terrorist activity, a massive illegal arms trade,
and a booming slave trade.

Then,
in 2016, candidate Trump again asserted that the U.S. should “take
the oil” when intervening or invading foreign nations.
Trump
 told NBC
News
 in
September 2016 that the terror group Daesh (ISIS) emerged only
because the U.S. had not taken Iraq’s oil after the 2003 invasion.

Trump
also stated, with regard to Iraq, that:

We
go in, we spent $3 trillion. We lose thousands and thousands of
lives, and then look, what happens is we get nothing. You know, it
used to be the victor belong the spoils. Now, there was no victor
there, believe me. There was no victory. But I always said, take the
oil.”

While
Trump has not publicly touted his “take the oil” policy in
relation to the current situation in Venezuela, he has done so
privately during several White House meetings early on in his
presidency. According to 
the Wall
Street Journal
:

Mr.
Trump requested a briefing on Venezuela in his second day in office,
often speaking to his team about the suffering of Venezuelan people
and the country’s immense potential to become a rich nation
through its oil reserves.”

Thus,
Bolton’s as well as Senator Rubio’s frank admissions that the
Trump administration’s Venezuela regime-change policy is about the
oil and giving that oil to American companies, are clearly aligned
with a policy that the president himself has long supported.

Washington’s
gift to Big Oil: privatize PDVSA, no matter the human cost

As
with Iraq, Libya and other U.S. oil-motivated interventions of the
past, the destruction of Venezuela’s nationalized oil industry and
its privatization to American oil companies — especially Chevron
and Halliburton — is the guiding factor behind the U.S.’ current
regime-change policy targeting Caracas. While past administrations
attempted to obfuscate their “wars for oil” as “restoring
democracy,” Trump administration officials and other “coup
architects” have recently “gone off script” and overtly stated
the guiding principle behind its Venezuela policy.

However,
the timing of the Trump administration’s regime-change push in
Venezuela is key. While companies like Chevron and Halliburton have
been hemorrhaging profits in recent years, they have so far withstood
the fallout due to the record high production of U.S. shale oil. Yet,
the “golden age” of U.S. shale is quickly disappearing, with 
top
industry insiders
 like
Harold Hamm along with 
Halliburton’s
rival company
,
Schlumberger, expecting shale output growth to slow by as much as 50
percent 
this
year
.
Hamm is 
a
close confidant
 of
President Trump.

If
this comes to pass, American oil companies will be in a bad way. Yet,
if Guaidó comes to power and privatizes PDVSA, U.S. oil companies —
with Chevron and Halliburton leading the pack — stand to make
record profits in the world’s most oil rich nation, as they did in
Iraq following the privatization of its national oil industry after
U.S. intervention.

Worst
of all, as the U.S.’ past interventions in Iraq and Libya and
elsewhere have shown, Washington stands willing to kill untold
thousands of innocent people in Venezuela — either through 
direct
military intervention
 or a
proxy war
 —
to benefit American oil companies. Will the American people let yet
another presidential administration destroy an entire nation for
Chevron, Halliburton and other powerful American corporations?

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

* Het gaat hier niet om economisch wanbeleid. De deplorabele toestand van de economie is één op één te danken aan de eerst stiekeme economische oorlogsvoering van de VS tegen Venezuela, die intussen is veranderd in een openlijke economische oorlogsvoering middels sancties, een oorlog waar ook Canada en de EU zich bij hebben aangesloten, naast fascistisch geregeerde landen als Brazilië, Colombia, Guatemala en Honduras…… (ja ook Nederland bevindt zich weer in ‘goed gezelschap…’)

Zie ook:

Joel Voordewind (CU 2de Kamer) bakt de ‘Venezolaanse vluchtelingencrisis’ op Curaçao wel erg bruin en van Ojik (GL 2de Kamer) schiet een Venezolaanse bok

BBC World Service radio >> fake news and other lies about Venezuela‘ (bericht van dit blog)

Venezolaanse verandering van regime bekokstoofd door VS en massamedia

Venezuela zou humanitaire hulp weigeren, het echte verhaal ziet er ‘iets anders’ uit

Guaidó is een ordinaire couppleger van de VS, e.e.a. gaat volledig in tegen de Venezolaanse constitutie

Venezuela >> regime change: ‘de 12 stappen methode’ die de VS gebruikt

Venezuela >> VS economische oorlogsvoering met gebruikmaking van o.a. IMF en Wereldbank

VS couppleger in Venezuela belooft VS Venezolaanse olie als hij de macht heeft overgenomen

Pompeo: US Military Obligated to “Take Down” the Iranians in Venezuela

(de opgeblazen oorlogshitser en oorlogsmisdadiger Pompeo beweert dat Hezbollah werkzaam is in Venezuela en daar een leger heeft dat gezien zijn woorden amper onder doet voor de gezamenlijke NAVO troepen… ha! ha! ha! Ook hier is totaal geen bewijs voor deze belachelijke beschuldiging…)

Mike Pence (vicepresident VS) gaf Guaidó, de door de VS gewenste leider, groen licht voor de coup in Venezuela

VS coup tegen Maduro in volle gang……..

Antiwar Hero Medea Benjamin Disrupts Pompeo Speech on Venezuela

Venezuela’s Military Chief, Foreign Allies Back Maduro

Als de VS stopt met spelen van ‘politieagent’ en het vernielen van de wereld, zullen de slechte krachten winnen……

VS weer op oorlogspad in Latijns-Amerika: Venezuela het volgende slachtoffer…….

Venezuela: VS verandering van regime mislukt >> de Venezolanen wacht een VS invasie

Vast Majority of Democrats Remain Silent or Support Coup in Venezuela

Trump wilde naast de economische oorlogsvoering tegen Venezuela dat land daadwerkelijk militair aanvallen……

Venezolaanse regionale verkiezingen gehekeld door westen, terwijl internationale waarnemers deze als eerlijk beoordeelden……….

Venezuela: Target of Economic Warfare

Venezuela: de anti-propaganda van John Oliver (en het grootste deel westerse massamedia) feilloos doorgeprikt

Venezuela: ‘studentenprotest’ wordt uitgevoerd door ingehuurde troepen………

Abby Martin Busts Open Myths on Venezuela’s Food Crisis: ‘Shelves Fully Stocked’‘ (zie ook de video in dat artikel!)

Rex Tillerson waarschuwt Venezuela voor een coup en beschuldigt China van imperialisme…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Edwin Koopman (VPRO Bureau Buitenland) over Venezolaanse verkiezingen met anti-Maduro propaganda bij de ‘onafhankelijke NOS…..

EU neemt uiterst hypocriet sancties tegen de Venezolaanse regering Maduro………

Venezuela ontwricht, wat de reguliere media u niet vertellen……..

VS steunt rechtse coalitie (MUD) in Venezuela………

Venezuela’s US-Backed Opposition Turns Up The Violence Following Assembly Vote

10 Things You Need to Know About the Terrorist Attack in Venezuela

Venezuelans in the Streets to Support Constituent Assembly

What Mainstream Media Got Wrong About Venezuela’s Constituent Assembly Vote‘ (met mogelijkheid tot directe vertaling)

The Left and Venezuela‘ (met mogelijkheid tot directe vertaling)

Rondje Venezuela schoppen op Radio1………

Karabulut (SP) blij dat ze Maduro eindelijk ook kan schoppen………

Venezuela moet en zal ‘verlost’ worden van Maduro, met ‘oh wonder’ een dikke rol van de VS en de reguliere westerse media

Venezolaanse regering treedt terecht op tegen de uiterst gewelddadige oppositie!!


Voor VS terreur tegen Bolivia:

NOS met fake news over Bolivia

Bolivianen eisen hun president terug


Bolivia: staatsgreep maakt eind aan succesvol presidentschap Evo Morales


Bolivia: bewijs op tafel dat VS aanstuurt op een coup

Bolivia’s Evo Morales ‘unhurt’ after helicopter emergency landing

The US EMBASSY in Bolivia continues carrying out covert actions to support the coup d’état against President Evo Morales.

Bolivia Closes 2018 Among The Highest Economic Growth Rates

Bolivia’s Remarkable Socialist Success Story: President Evo Morales has transformed his country’s economy with an unapologetically left-wing agenda.

Trumps beslissing de VS terug te trekken uit Syrië, wordt door Bolton en Netanyahu geblokkeerd

Nadat Trump zijn ‘besluit’ bekend maakte VS troepen snel terug te trekken uit Syrië, brak er een storm van protest los bij VS politici van de democraten, republikeinen en van Israël. Alsof de bezetting door de VS van Syrisch grondgebied volkomen legitiem was….. Zoals je waarschijnlijk wel weet, is de VS illegaal aanwezig op soeverein Syrisch grondgebied…….

Snel na de verklaring van Trump verzekerde oorlogsmisdadiger Bolton al dat het zo’n vaart niet zou lopen en alsof hij Trump kon besturen, verklaarde deze dat de terugtrekking van VS troepen uit Syrië, niet op stel en sprong zou worden uitgevoerd……..

De corrupte oorlogsmisdadiger Netanyahu had het gore lef te stellen dat voor Israël de legitimatie van de annexatie van de Golanhoogten middels het verkrijgen van soevereiniteit over het gebied, de belangrijkste reden was om te protesteren tegen de terugtrekking van VS troepen uit Syrië, althans zeker niet te snel…

Het is dan ook duidelijk dat Trumps macht intussen aan banden ligt. Bolton die Trump adviseert, stelde dan ook dat de terugtrekking van VS troepen uit Syrië, gecoördineerd zal worden met de fascistische terreur- en apartheidsstaat Israël…..

John Bolton | Benjamin Netanyahu

(foto bij het originele artikel op MintPress News)

Overigens is er een tweede reden voor een langzame terugtrekking van VS troepen uit Syrië, waarbij Israël nogmaals een belangrijke rol speelt: Iran en Hezbollah, die beiden strijders hebben in Syrië….. Een langzame terugtrekking van VS troepen, zodat er niet een ‘snelweg’ tussen Iran en Libanon zal ontstaan, een weg waarover Iran dan wapens en ander oorlogstuig voor Hezbollah zou kunnen vervoeren richting Libanon…….. 

Terwijl Israël intussen al honderden gevechtsvluchten heeft uitgevoerd op Syrisch grondgebied (en dat via een illegale aanvliegroute over Libanon….), stuk voor stuk ernstige oorlogsmisdaden, waarbij Israël, als het al toegeeft een bombardement te hebben uitgevoerd, steevast het argument noemt dat men met deze bombardementen heeft willen voorkomen dat er oorlogstuig richting Libanon wordt vervoerd….. Dit in tegenstelling tot bijvoorbeeld de doelen die Israël bombardeert, meestal posities of bases van het reguliere Syrische leger……

Voorts staan de ‘gematigde’ terreurgroepen, inclusief IS, achter de wens van Israël de soevereiniteit over de Golanhoogten te krijgen en definitief aan haar grondgebied toe te voegen….. De terreurgroepen staan achter deze wil van Israël vanwege de hulp die Israël aan die terreurgroepen gaf. Zo heeft Israël meermaals Syrische reguliere troepen gebombardeerd, als zij terreurgroepen in de buurt van de Golanhoogten dreigden te overvleugelen en heeft Israël jihadterroristen die gewond waren geraakt in Syrië, opgeknapt op de Golanhoogten en in ernstige gevallen zelfs in Israëlische in ziekenhuizen……

Lees het volgende meer uitgebreide artikel, eerder gepubliceerd op MintPress News en door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media:

With Golan at Stake, Netanyahu, Bolton Set Trump Straight on US Syria Withdrawal Plan

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor With Golan Heights at Stake, Netanyahu and Bolton Set Trump Straight on Syria

January 7, 2019 at 11:29 pm

Written by Whitney Webb

(MPN) — The state of Israel seems to share at least some of the responsibility for the latest shift of U.S. Syria policy — as National Security Adviser John Bolton announced on Sunday that President Donald Trump’s call to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria would now be “coordinated” with Israel, after meeting with top Israeli officials including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

John Bolton | Benjamin Netanyahu

(foto bij het originele artikel op MintPress News)

Israel’s main motivation in preventing a swift U.S. exit from Syria was also made explicit by Netanyahu, who openly stated on Twitter that Israel’s push to obtain sovereignty over the occupied Golan Heights – which is internationally recognized as part of Syria – was the driving factor behind Israel’s recent efforts to dramatically slow down Trump’s plan for an “immediate” withdrawal of U.S. troops currently occupying Syrian territory illegally.

As MintPress noted at the time of Trump’s withdrawal announcement, Israel’s influence on Trump’s Middle East policy and Israel’s push towards containing “Iranian influence” in Syria would mean that Trump’s plan to withdraw troops over the alleged defeat of ISIS would likely never materialize if it was opposed by Tel Aviv.

This was apparently and not surprisingly the case as, soon after Trump’s announcement that he planned to bring U.S. troops home from Syria last month, Israel’s government announced that it would dramatically rev up its direct involvement in the Syrian conflict in the U.S.’ absence. That involvement had so far been limited to hundreds of unilateral airstrikes on Syrian government and military targets over the course of the nearly eight-year-long war. Israel’s threat of escalation revealed Israel’s unwillingness to see foreign pressure on Damascus reduced.

Israel’s military — currently headed by Netanyahu, who is also serving as Israel’s defense minister — made good on this promise to increase its military involvement in Syria soon after, using civilian airplanes as cover to launch airstrikes on Syria on Christmas Day.

However, Israel’s reaction to Trump’s announcement appears to have been much more extensive than its decision to increase its airstrikes targeting Syrian territory. After meeting with Netanyahu and the director of Israeli intelligence, Bolton noted on Twitter that the “U.S. drawdown in Syria” would now be “coordinated” with Israel. Also on Sunday, Bolton announced that the U.S. had no timetable for troop withdrawal from Syria and that the troop withdrawal was also conditional.

John Bolton

@AmbJohnBolton

I met w/ PM @netanyahu, the Director of Mossad, & the Israeli Atomic Energy Commissioner. Discussions included our ongoing efforts to expand & enhance our historic partnership w/ Israel, our mutual response to the threat from Iran, & the coordinated U.S. drawdown in Syria.


4,430

1:13 AM – Jan 7, 2019

This is just the latest indication that the state of Israel is acquiring unprecedented influence over U.S. troop deployments in the region, as the commander of U.S. European Command (EURCOM) noted last year that Israeli generals — not American generals — have the power to deploy U.S. troops to Israel to fight on Israel’s behalf. Now, Bolton — after meeting with Israeli officials — has stated that Israel’s government will also wield tremendous influence over whether or not U.S. troops will be leaving Syria.

Spotlight on the Golan Heights

In publicly discussing his meeting with Bolton on Twitter, Netanyahu noted that a key topic of ongoing discussion with Bolton regarding Syria would involve Israel’s claim to the Golan Heights, a plateau bordering Israel, Lebanon and Syria that Israel has occupied since 1967 and later annexed in 1981.

Netanyahu announced that he and Bolton would be traveling together to the area on Monday and added:

The Golan Heights is tremendously important for our security. When you’re there you’ll be able to understand perfectly why we’ll never leave the Golan Heights and why it’s Heights
and why it’s important all countries recognize Israel’s
sovereignty over it.”

PM of Israel


@IsraeliPM

Replying to @IsraeliPM

And you have backed Israel’s right to defend itself which we exercise constantly. It’s important to know that we have the backing of our great friend and ally the United States of America.

View image on Twitter

PM of Israel


@IsraeliPM

Tomorrow we’ll go up to the Golan Heights. The Golan Heights is tremendously important for our security. When you’re there you’ll be able to understand perfectly why we’ll never leave the Golan Heights and why it’s important all countries recognize Israel’s sovereignty over it. pic.twitter.com/ejgMbbcd5V


620

View image on Twitter

As MintPress has
noted in the past, understanding the significance of the Golan
Heights is in many ways key to understanding why the Syrian conflict
was engineered by foreign powers in the first place. This is because,
with the Golan Heights in mind, Israel
 hatched
a plan

in 2006 to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad by creating
sectarian strife in the country with the hopes that whoever succeeded
Assad would be willing to relinquish Syria’s claim to the
territory.

Yet,
this plan was never designed to be enacted by Israel but instead by
the United States. The U.S. eventually adopted the plan and the
communications of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revealed
it was a driving factor in U.S. policy leading up to the genesis of
the Syrian conflict. One of her leaked
 emails,
published by WikiLeaks, stated that “the best way to help Israel
deal with Iran’s growing nuclear capability is to help the people
of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad.”

That
same email also noted that “a successful intervention in Syria
would require substantial diplomatic and military leadership from the
United States.” It added that “arming the Syrian rebels and using
Western air power to ground Syrian helicopters and airplanes is a
low-cost high-payoff approach.”

Unsurprisingly,
official recognition of Israel’s annexation of the Golan was
prominent among the regime-change promises touted by Syrian “rebels.”
Over the course of the war, rebels have,  in their bid to
overthrow Assad, offered to “
trade
or
 sell the
Golan Heights to Israel in exchange for military aid or an
Israeli-imposed “no-fly zone.”

This
also helps explain why Israel was so eager to fund, arm and aid
“rebel” groups along the Syria-Israel border, as it offered the
justification for the Israeli occupation of a “buffer zone” that,
according to Syrian opposition sources and Israeli-American NGOs, was
“intended to keep the Syrian army and its Iranian and Lebanese
allies as far away from Israel’s border as possible, as well as
solidify Israel’s control over the occupied Golan Heights.”
However, the success of the Syrian military’s efforts in southern
Syria forced Israel to abandon its buffer zone and seek other means
to strengthen its claim to the territory.

The
Golan: What’s in it for Israel?

Israel
created this plan to weaken or overthrow the Syrian state largely
because it is eager to cement its claim to the Golan Heights. In
order to accomplish that, regime change in Syria is essential, as the
international community 
still
refuses
 to
recognize Israel’s seizure and continued occupation of the Golan as
legal. This bars Israel from commercially developing the area’s
rich resources, which explains Israel’s willingness to go to war
over a 
seemingly small
and insignificant tract of land. However, a new Syrian government,
one more “friendly” to Israeli interests, could officially
relinquish Syria’s claim to the Golan, paving the way for the
complete and official annexation of the territory by Israel.

At
the time the plan was created, the main motivator for Israel was the
Golan’s freshwater reserves, as the Golan is
 one
of three sources
 of
freshwater available to the Israeli state — and is the largest in
size and most abundant, as it includes the mountain streams that feed
Lake Kinneret (the Sea of Galilee) and the headwaters of the Jordan
river.

This
makes this area even more important to Israel, given that Israel is
in its
 sixth
year
 of
a drought so massive that a NASA study called it the worst drought in
the region in
 nearly
900 years
.
Thus, the water resources of the Golan Heights are essential to
Israel’s existence as well as its expansionist ambitions.

Though
recent Israeli investment in desalination plants have since reduced
its dependence on Golan water resources, the discovery of oil in the
Golan in 2015 dramatically strengthened Israel’s resolve to gain
complete sovereignty over the occupied territory.

The
oil reserve discovered in the Golan Heights is estimated to contain
“billions of barrels” of crude oil that could turn Israel –
which currently imports the vast majority of its fuel – into a net
oil exporter. Yet, because the Golan Heights are internationally
recognized as being under occupation and not an official part of
Israel, the commercial extraction and export of this vast oil reserve
cannot move forward — until this status changes.

As
a result, only exploratory wells have been drilled, mostly by
a
 division
of Genie Energy Co.
,
a U.S.-based oil company connected to Rupert Murdoch, Jacob
Rothschild, Dick Cheney and former CIA Director James Woolsey, among
other powerful individuals in the U.S. and the U.K.

The
involvement of such influential figures in future oil extraction
endeavors in the Golan Heights – dependent as they are on Israel
acquiring sovereignty over the territory — likely explains why the
U.S., as well as the U.K., has been so willing to help initiate and
then perpetuate the Syrian conflict, which is soon to enter its
eighth year.

Geopolitics
First: The America-Israel Mideast axis

While
Netanyahu’s statements show that the Golan Heights is a key driver
for Israel in its refusal to let the Syrian conflict wind down, it is
important to note that Israel and its allies abroad are also
interested in the partitioning of Syria in order to keep the country
weak and conflict-ridden for the foreseeable future. This call to
partition Syria as well as other countries in the region, such as
Iraq, dates back to the Yinon Plan that was developed in 1982 and
seeks to partition and weaken other regional states through the
engineering of sectarianism, in order to allow Israel to emerge as
the region’s sole superpower.

This
is worth pointing out, given Israel’s recent effort to take control
of the U.S. troop pull-out (or lack thereof) from Syria, as the U.S.
State Department is also promoting a plan as of this past weekend
that would push for the partition of northeastern Syria were U.S.
troops to begin to withdraw from Syrian territory.

Thus,
the announcement that the troop “withdrawal” will now be
coordinated with Israel and that the U.S.’ new policy for
northeastern Syria will involve partition shows that another “America
First” Trump policy has quickly morphed instead into an “Israel
First” plan.

By Whitney
Webb
 / Creative
Commons
 / MintPress
News
 / Report
a typo

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

Zie ook:

VS oorlogshitsers wijzen hysterisch op aanslag als teken dat VS in Syrië moet blijven

CBC Nova Scotia meldt zojuist dat de eerste VS troepenvermindering in Syrië een feit is: 10 militaire trucks zijn de grens met Irak overgestoken…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

VS trekt troepen terug uit Syrië zodat Turkije een massale aanval kan lanceren op de Koerden……

Erdogan stelt militaire operatie uit op verzoek van Trump >> Turkse inval op Syrisch-Koerdisch gebied aanstaande

Reactions to Trump’s Syria Withdrawal Plan Say More Than the Plan Itself

Trump’s Surprise Syria Pullout Fuels Backlash From Hawks Across DC

Officials: US Warplanes Will Stop Bombing Syria After Troops Leave

10 Takeaways on Mattis Exit and Possible US Withdrawal From Syria and Afghanistan

US Set for “Full Withdrawal” From Syria as Trump Claims Victory