Tag: CSIS

About CSIS

Subscribe Feeds

VS moet stoppen met de bouw van nog een militaire luchtmachtbasis op Okinawa

Posted on by Willem Wachtmeester

World Beyond War (WBW) is een petitie gestart om VS president Joe Biden te bewegen de in aanbouw zijnde extra militaire luchtmachtbasis op Okinawa te stoppen. Een enorm aantal organisaties heeft zich al achter deze petitie geschaard, alsook Denny Tamaki, de gouverneur van dat Japanse eiland….. Daarnaast heeft meer dan 70% van de bevolking zich uitgesproken tegen de bouw van deze basis met de naam Henoko….. 

De bouw van deze basis vormt bovendien een groot gevaar voor het kwetsbare ecosysteem van de Okinawa kustwateren….. Daarnaast wordt de bevolking van Okinawa geplaagd door: -geluidsoverlast van de al bestaande luchtmachtbasis op dat eiland (landende en opstijgende militaire vliegtuigen), -de zware luchtvervuiling, inclusief het kankerverwekkende ultrafijnstof, geproduceerd door deze vliegtuigen, -misdadig gedrag van het personeel van de al bestaande VS bases (zoals verkrachting van meisjes en vrouwen) en -milieuvervuiling van de bodem en zee (dat tevens een gevaar vormt voor het al aangehaalde ecosysteem in de kustwateren) met giftige stoffen zoals PFAS……

Ondanks dat Okinawa maar 0,6% van het totale gebied van Japan beslaat, heeft het eiland 70% van het totaal aantal militaire VS bases, inclusief een luchtmachtbasis…… In totaal wordt er 20% van het Okinawa grondgebied gebruikt voor VS bases….. (Japan huisvest in totaal 119 militaire bases van de VS…)…. Daarnaast zou de nieuwe basis worden gebouwd op een actieve breuk, waardoor de desastreuze gevolgen van een aardbeving onder die basis, een groot gevaar vormen voor mens en natuur….. (denk daarbij o.a. aan tanks met kerosine op die basis*)

De kosten voor de bouw van de basis is al meer dan 2 keer verdubbeld van 3,3 miljard naar 8,7 miljard dollar en volgens een aantal ingenieurs zal de basis nooit afgebouwd worden, zoals die van het Center for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS), waarbij men ook wijst op de actieve breuk onder die basis…..

Je kan er donder opzeggen dat het besluit tot de bouw van deze basis is ingegeven door de plannen van het Pentagon om China (en/of Noord-Korea) aan te vallen……. (waarbij men zelfs uitgaat van de mogelijkheid een ‘beperkte nucleaire’ oorlog te voeren tegen China…..**)

Het is zonder meer een schande dat de Japanse regering toestemming voor de bouw heeft gegeven, terwijl men wist wat dit betekent voor de al door VS bases geplaagde inwoners van Okinawa……..

Terecht mogen ook wij deze petitie tekenen, dus doe dat alsjeblieft en geeft het door!!

End the U.S. Military Air Base Contruction in Henoko, Okinawa 

To:
U.S. President Joe Biden

From:
[Your Name]

We, the undersigned,
wish to convey our strong support for the Governor of Okinawa, Denny
Tamaki, and the indigenous people of Okinawa, and their request for the
cessation of the building of a U.S. military airbase in Henoko.

On January 13th 2021, Governor Tamaki sent a letter to President
Biden (enclosed) outlining the many reasons the airbase construction
project at Henoko should be dismantled, including:

Overwhelming opposition by the Indigenous Okinawan people. In a
prefectural referendum, 71.7% voted against the project. There have been
continuous protests and even hunger strikes by the public.

Engineering unfeasibility. The construction plan requires large-scale
land reclamation work, but the seabed that will be reclaimed is as soft
as mayonnaise and poses massive engineering problems which has caused
the completion date pushed from 2014 to 2030 and the cost from $3.3
billion to $8.7 billion. Some engineers do not believe that it is even
possible to build. Even Mark Cancian of the Center for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS) has concluded in a fact-driven report that
it is unlikely that the project will ever be completed.[1] Moreover, the
site is vulnerable to earthquakes. There is an active fault under the
site.[2]

Irreparable environmental damage. The ocean area that is being
reclaimed is unique in its biodiversity and is the home of endangered
marine mammals such as dugongs.

The United States maintains 119 military facilities in Japan.
Okinawa, which makes up only 0.6% of the entire land area of Japan holds
70% of these facilities, which cover 20% of this small island. For
decades, the people of Okinawa have suffered at the hands of occupying
forces. The U.S. military has already caused grievous harm by aircraft
accidents, crimes by U.S. service members and major environmental
pollution by toxic substances such as PFAS. The very least the U.S.
could do is to stop building yet another base on this besieged island.

Sincerely,

________________________ ________________________ ________________________

1 Mark F. Cancian, “U.S. Military Forces in FY 2021: Marine Corps”
(Center for Strategic and International Studies, November 2020), p12.
https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/
201114_Cancian_FY2021_Marine_Corps.pdf

2 Ikue NAKAIMA, “Expert indicates that an active fault line in the
undersea section of the Henoko Base construction zone could pose
danger,” Ryukyu Shimpo (25 October 2017).
http://english.ryukyushimpo.jp/2017/10/31/27956/

Enclosure: Governor of Okinawa Prefecture, Japan, Denny Tamaki,
letter to President-elect Biden and Vice President-Elect Harris, dated
13 January 2021 (see below)

Zie ook de volgende video’s, al moet je voor de tweede video het Japans machtig zijn: 

 ——————————–

Hier de tekst van de petitie voor president Joe Biden en vicepresident Kamala Harris:

January 13, 2021

Dear President-Elect Biden and Vice President-Elect Harris,

On behalf of the 1.45 million people of Okinawa, Japan, I would like
to congratulate you on your election to be the next President and Vice
President of the United States. We appreciate the United States’
tremendous contributions to Japan’s national security as well as to the
peace and stability in East Asia.

Many people in the United States have personal relationships with
Okinawa. For example, the Okinawa Association of America in the State of
California has the largest membership in the mainland United States,
and it has reached over 1,000 members. Likewise, about 50,000 people in
the State of Hawaii have Okinawan ancestry through immigration. The
people of Okinawa also have fostered its unique culture by incorporating
American culture after World War II. These symbolize the strong,
history-based ties between the United States and Okinawa, and I look
forward to building close relations with your Administration.

I understand that Japan-U.S. relations, including the bilateral
security alliance, have contributed greatly to Japan’s national security
as well as the peace and stability in East Asia. Meanwhile, Okinawa has
played a disproportionately large role in upholding the alliance. More
than 70 percent of the military facilities exclusively used by the U.S.
forces in Japan (including Kadena Air Base) are concentrated on Okinawa,
even though Okinawa accounts for only 0.6 percent of the entire land
area of Japan. This has led to numerous difficulties for the people of
Okinawa since the end of World War II. These include military aircraft
noise/accidents, unfortunate crimes committed by U.S. service members,
and environmental pollution by toxic substances such as PFAS.

Given the recent military rise of China, the U.S. military bases
concentrated in Okinawa have become increasingly vulnerable. I am aware
that the U.S. Marines have introduced new operational concepts such as
the Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABO) and are shifting to
deploying more dispersed, small-scale capabilities over the
Indo-Pacific. In the hope of keeping the Japan-U.S. alliance
sustainable, I would like to request your support to reduce the military
footprint in Okinawa when making further decisions regarding
Indo-Pacific policies.

Currently, the construction project of the Futenma Replacement
Facility (FRF) on Okinawa faces strong public opposition. The former
Governor Takeshi Onaga and I won the gubernatorial elections by holding
up a campaign promise to oppose the plan. In a prefectural referendum on
the FRF project, 434,273 people, accounting for the overwhelming
majority of total voters (71.7 percent), casted votes in opposition to
the project.

The construction plan requires large-scale land reclamation work, but
the ocean where the work is planned is globally known for its vast
biodiversity and is home to endangered marine mammals such as dugongs.
Since the seabed that will be reclaimed is as soft as mayonnaise, the
project requires a massive foundation improvement by driving 71,000
piles into the seabed. The Japanese government, which oversees the
project, currently estimates that the construction will take at least
another 12 years with an overall cost of about $9.3 billion. Geologists
also warn of the risk of potential uneven ground subsidence because
about 70% of the reclamation work will be conducted in an area where the
water is very deep, the seabed is very uneven, and the soft foundation
is distributed randomly. The seismic activities in the area have also
been addressed by experts, who have expressed concern about the
existence of active earthquake fault lines.

These difficulties could adversely impact the Marines’ future
operations in the FRF even after the project is completed more than 10
years from now. If a strong earthquake occurs in the area, it could
cause serious risks to U.S. service members, the Marines’ equipment and
facilities, and the overall U.S. national interest. With these issues in
mind, I would like to request a comprehensive reassessment of the
project by your Administration.

We thank you for your attention in this matter and look forward to working together.

Sincerely,

Denny Tamaki Governor of Okinawa Prefecture, Japan

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

Hier nog een foto van de Henoko luchtmachtbasis in aanbouw:

Een foto overgenomen uit het artikel ‘Work on U.S. base at Henoko in Okinawa to cost nearly triple initial estimate‘, gepubliceerd door The Japan Times.

———————————–

* Op Hawai vormen dergelijke tanks door verwaarlozing een groot gevaar >> zie: ‘Hawaï: grondwater wordt bedreigd door ‘versleten’ mega tanks brandstof van VS leger’

** Zie o.a.: ‘VS agressie politiek ten aanzien van China en Iran is desastreus en gevaarlijk voor de hele wereld‘ Zie ook de de film: The Coming War On China van John Pilger, waarnaar je een link vindt in dat bericht en zie de links naar andere artikelen betreffende de agressie van de VS.

———————————–

Voorts zie: ‘VS bezig geheime basis uit te breiden als voorbereiding op oorlog met China en/of Noord-Korea‘ (20 juli 2020)

‘VS gaat raket oefeningen houden op Okinawa, ofwel bouwt de spanningen met China verder op….‘ (7 januari 2019)

‘Als de VS niet de VS was, zou de Verenigde Staten dit gestolen land bombarderen…….‘ (14 februari 2018 en zie de links in dat bericht!!)

‘Jeremy Corbyn krijgt echt belangrijke vredesprijs >> aandacht van de reguliere media: nul komma nada…‘ (12 december 2017) En zie de links in dat bericht naar meer artikelen over o.a.de demonisering van Corbyn door de reguliere westerse media (inclusief de zogenaamd onafhankelijke NOS) als zou hij een antisemiet zijn, een leugen van walgelijke proporties……

‘VS: China is een gevaar, terwijl China, uh de VS dat land omsingeld heeft met 400 bases………..‘ (31 oktober 2016)

Media in VS ‘bezorgd over vrouwenrechten’ in Afghanistan als de VS troepen vertrekken

Posted on by Willem Wachtmeester

Op een uitermate smerige manier doen de reguliere media en denktanks in de VS alsof hen de vrouwenrechten aan het hart gaan, terwijl dezelfde organen er totaal geen moeite mee hebben dat de VS en haar oorlogshond de NAVO alleen deze eeuw al meer dan 5 miljoen mensen (waaronder een enorm aantal vrouwen) hebben vermoord in oorlogen die middels leugens werden ‘gelegitimeerd’, ofwel in illegale oorlogen (zonder een resolutie van de VN….)….. 

Zoals gezegd: onder die 5 miljoen vermoorden een groot aantal vrouwen (en kinderen) die niet eerst werden gevraagd of het goed was dat men hen vermoordde en dat ‘voor een bijkomende legitimering dat hun seksegenoten daardoor meer rechten zouden krijgen…..’ (hoe sarcastisch en cynisch wil je het hebben….??!!!) Met het terreur-moordprogramma van het Pentagon en de CIA, waarmee men al vele duizenden verdachten middels drones heeft vermoord, zonder tussenkomst van de rechter, was zelfs meer dan 90% van de slachtoffers vrouw en kind……. (ofwel mensen die niet eens werden verdacht!!) En dit programma gaat dag en nacht door en dat 365 dagen per jaar, zonder een onvertogen woord van de massamedia in de VS…… (en de rest van het westen…..)

Uiteraard interesseert het de VS geen ene zier dat vrouwenrechten zwaar geweld worden aangedaan, zie de goede banden van de VS met landen waar de vrouw wordt behandeld als een stuk vuil, neem Saoedi-Arabië en de Verenigde Arabische Emiraten (VAE), om er een paar te noemen….. Opmerkelijk ook dat men spreekt over een grote winst voor de Afghaanse vrouwen door de illegale oorlog die de VS en de NAVO daar hebben gevoerd en voeren, echter hooguit in de paar grote steden is de situatie voor vrouwen iets verbeterd en de scholen voor meisjes die o.a. Nederland heeft gebouwd zijn voor een groot deel in gebruik voor andere doeleinden, of ze zijn gebulldozerd……

De VS wil niet weg uit Afghanistan, zeker niet zolang het landen als Iran en Rusland op de korrel heeft, immers het is een strategisch gelegen land…..

Ongelofelijk te lezen in het door Caitlin Johnstone geschreven artikel dat zelfs CNN zich opwerpt als verdediger en promotor van vrouwenrechten, ach wat zeg ik: dit mediaorgaan staat erom bekend zich druk te maken over mensenrechten als het om landen gaat waaraan de VS een broertje dood heeft, terwijl de enorme mensenrechtenschendingen van de VS in haar eigen gebied niet eens de voorpagina’s van de kranten halen, sterker nog deze halen vaak niet eens de achterpagina…..

Caitlin haalt verder Annie Pforzheimer van het Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) aan, die met dit lamlendige excuus voor handhaven van troepensterkte in Afghanistan komt….. Je ziet pas echt hoe kwaadaardig deze trol is als je weet wie het CSIS subsidieert: oorlogswinstmakers als de wapenfabrikanten Northrop Grumman en Boeing, met daarnaast oliemaatschappijen Chevron, ExxonMobil en…. Saudi Aramco!! (je weet wel de oliemaatschappij van zo ongeveer het meest vrouwonvriendelijk land ter wereld: Saoedi-Arabië….) Denktank CSIS is dan ook een denktank die vooral oorlog promoot en daar haar verdienmodel aan dankt, wat betreft media als CNN kan je zeggen dat de westerse media vooral propaganda in het voordeel brengen van de VS (de grootste terreurentiteit ter wereld, Ap), zo stelt Caitlin volkomen terecht!!

Lees het artikel van Caitlin en zegt het voort!! Het is de hoogste tijd dat de comateuze westerse volkeren worden gewekt en zien dat de grootschalige VS en NAVO terreur moet worden gestopt daar deze alleen maar dood en ellende brengen en daarmee terreur en vluchtelingen kweekt op de straten van West- en Zuid-Europa…… (plus uiteraard enorme vernielingen, die dan weer mogen worden hersteld door bedrijven uit m.n. de VS [ook al ‘lekker cynisch’]…..) 

Media Concern Trolling About Afghanistan Withdrawal Again


by Caitlin Johnstone

“Concerns mount that US withdrawal from Afghanistan could risk progress on women’s rights,” blares a new headline from CNN.

“Concerns
are mounting from bipartisan US lawmakers and Afghan women’s rights
activists that the hard-won gains for women and civil society in
Afghanistan could be lost if the United States makes a precipitous
withdrawal from the country,” CNN tells us.

What
follows is yet another concern-trolling empire blog about why US troops
need to stay in Afghanistan, joining recent others geared toward the
same end like this CNN report about how the US military will open itself up to “costly litigation” if it withdraws now because it signed defense industry contracts into 2023, and this one by The New York Times about a US intelligence report urgently warning that a withdrawal from Afghanistan could lead to the nation being controlled by the people who live there.


CNN Politics  ✔

@CNNPolitics

Concerns mount that US withdrawal from Afghanistan could risk progress on women’s rights https://cnn.it/320YcgL 

Concerns mount that US withdrawal from Afghanistan could risk progress on women’s rights    Concerns
are mounting from bipartisan US lawmakers and Afghan women’s rights
activists that the hard-won gains for women and civil society in
Afghanistan could be lost if the United States makes a…

cnn.com

796

2,084 people are talking about this

 

This latest article by CNN features an extensive series of quotes
by Annie Pforzheimer of the Center for Strategic and International
Studies (CSIS) think tank regurgitating the tired old mantra that a
withdrawal from Afghanistan needs to be “conditions-based”, to ensure
that no women will be mistreated if the US ends its twenty-year military
occupation of the country.

CSIS, for the record, is funded by
war profiteering corporations like Northrop Grumman and Boeing, as well
as fossil fuel companies like Chevron, ExxonMobil and Saudi Aramco. It
is also funded by plutocrats. It is also funded directly by the United States government and
its allies. This article is precisely the sort of narrative management
initiative that such think tanks exist for, and the fact that it’s
considered normal journalistic practice to quote sources with such
blatant ulterior motives as objective experts shows that western news media is propaganda.

When
think tankers like Pforzheimer babble about a “conditions-based
withdrawal” from Afghanistan, they are lying about what the requisite
“conditions” would actually be. A complete and total withdrawal will
have nothing to do with whether women are guaranteed to be treated
nicely. It will have nothing to do with whether defense contractors will
sue the US government or whether the Taliban will be able to retake
control of the nation. A complete and total withdrawal from Afghanistan
will happen when Afghanistan ceases to be a vital geostrategic point of control,
which effectively means the US will maintain some sort of foothold in
Afghanistan for as long as China, Russia and Iran remain sovereign
nations.

A
US puppet regime in Beijing, Moscow, and Tehran. If that somehow
happens one day, the empire will have no further use for Afghanistan.
Those are the real “conditions”.

The
US empire does not care about women. The US empire routinely kills
women and creates lawless environments where rape and sexual slavery are
commonplace with its military interventionism. What this hand-wringing
about women’s rights in Afghanistan has actually accomplished is a
convenient justification for further military occupation, a destructive industry of shady NGOs, and functionally not much else.

But
this argument wouldn’t even make sense if it was sincere. The only way
to argue with logical coherence that the US should militarily occupy a
nation to uphold liberal values is to also argue that the US should
invade and occupy all other nations in the world with illiberal cultural
values and force them all to change at gunpoint. Unless you uphold this
argument with logical consistency in this way (and almost nobody does
this because that would be insane), it looks like you’re simply making
up arguments to justify invading and occupying geostrategically crucial
regions with great military and resource value. And, of course, this is exactly what you are doing.

So
much empire propaganda is just concern trolling at mass scale. Oh my it
sure is concerning how they’re abusing that poor oppressed population
in that nation whose government we just so happen to want to topple.
Sure we’d have to butcher mountains of human beings and destabilize
entire vast regions in order to rescue them, but that’s a sacrifice we’d
be willing to make. We are humanitarians, after all.


Caitlin Johnstone 


@caitoz

Breaking News: A U.S. troop withdrawal would put Afghanistan at risk of being overrun and taken over by the people who live there. https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1375546199344869377 …


The New York Times

✔

@nytimes

Breaking News: A U.S. intelligence report said the Taliban are poised to take power in Afghanistan within two or three years after the withdrawal of international forces. Some officials are using it to urge President Biden not to withdraw troops. https://nyti.ms/3svhOoL 

585

229 people are talking about this

“Concern”
is the propaganda carrier for the most violent of interventions. If
imperialism was a virus, “concern” would be the benign-looking shape it
took so the body didn’t set off an immune response. “Concern” is the
most Karen of manipulations.

Still
it says a lot that they need to tug at our humanitarian heart strings
like that in order to advance their empire-building agendas these days.
It used to be stuff like “They’re savages and they need to learn about
Jesus,” or even just “Your King has decreed that those people shouldn’t
get to control the land they live on anymore.”

We’ve
evolved as a society to the point where at least now they need to
appeal to our better demons. Where they need to hide their disgusting
agendas behind noble-looking ones.

Let’s
keep evolving, please. Maybe our collective consciousness can expand so
far that they won’t be able to get away with any of their psychopathic
murderousness at all.

_____________________

New book: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix.

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 at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, or throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi, Patreon or Paypal. If you want to read more you can buy my books. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2 

Caitlin Johnstone | April 11, 2021 at 12:08 pm | Tags: afghanistan, empire, media, news, propaganda, war
| Categories: Article, News
| URL: https://wp.me/p9tj6M-2xx

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

Zie ook:  ‘VS en NAVO-partners
laten per dag 46 bommen vallen en dat al 20 jaar lang: hoe bedoel je:
‘islam terreur’ komt uit de lucht vallen‘

‘Groot-Brittannië plaatst zich naast de VS tegen China en gaat haar kernwapenarsenaal uitbreiden‘

‘Landsadvocaat
vindt dat het Nederlandse leger niets verkeerd heeft gedaan toen het in
2007 een massamoord beging op de bevolking van een Afghaans dorp‘

‘Geheime
diensten in de VS waarschuwen ervoor dat terugtrekking van de troepen
er toe zal leiden dat Afghanistan door Afghanen zal worden
geregeerd…….. OEI!!‘ (en lees de berichten onder de links in dat bericht)

‘De Bundeswehr massamoord op 142 Afghanen >> 4 september 2009‘ (en lees de berichten onder de links in dat bericht)

‘Uruzgan: VS vernietigt militaire basis van bevriend Afghaanse leger in precisie bombardement‘

‘Afghanistan, westerse terreur: in juli 1.400 burgerslachtoffers‘

‘Meerderheid van burgerslachtoffers Afghanistan vermoord door de westerse coalitie en het Afghaanse leger‘

‘Arnon Grunberg bagatelliseert tevergeefs embedded zijn bij Nederlands leger in Afghanistan en Irak‘

‘Afghanistan oorlog: militaire top VS zei al voor het begin dat dit een niet te winnen oorlog is‘

‘VS wist al een paar weken dat zich op een later te bombarderen doel in Afghanistan (veel) burgers bevonden‘ 

‘VS ramt ditmaal hek van gebombardeerd ziekenhuis‘ 

‘VS
bombardeerde het Artsen zonder Grenzen ziekenhuis in Kunduz niet per
ongeluk………. Ofwel: VS terreur op grote schaal, over een lange
periode!!‘ 

‘Artsen
zonder Grenzen ziekenhuis: tijdens bombardement werden vluchtenden
vanaf relatief korte afstand beschoten……. Vergissing??‘ 

‘Irak: de illegale oorlog van de VS begon 18 jaar geleden‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht!!)

‘Een tweede oorlog tegen terreur ligt op de loer, terwijl een film de ‘oorlogsmisdaden’ van de eerste laat zien‘ (lezen en zien mensen!!)

‘VN waarschuwt voor honger in Syrië, maar weigert de schuldige aan te wijzen: de VS…….‘ 

‘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……..‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht)

‘Tulsi Gabbard (2de Congreslid voor Hawaï) stelt dat de VS een smerige oorlog voert in Syrië‘

‘Niet
Rusland en China zijn een gevaar voor de wereld, maar de VS met haar
ongebreidelde agressie en meer dan 800 militaire bases over de aarde‘

‘Idlib: westerse anti-Syrische en -Russische propaganda‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht)

‘9/11: de teller voor het aantal door VS/NAVO gedode mensen staat intussen op meer dan 2,5 miljoen‘
(en zie de links in dat bericht naar meer artikelen over 9/11) (de 2,5
miljoen vermoorde mensen vormen een oud cijfer dat na onderzoek intussen is
bijgesteld naar 5 miljoen….; zie de volgende link:)

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

‘BBC met uiterst hypocriete anti-Taliban propaganda‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht naar artikelen over westerse ‘moordpartijen’ in Afghanistan)

‘Brett Kavanaugh heeft lak aan internationaal recht en mensenrechten, dus ook aan seksueel geweld tegen vrouwen…….‘

‘Roemenië en Litouwen faciliteerden geheime CIA gevangenis………‘

‘VS wordt eindelijk aangeklaagd voor oorlogsmisdaden bij Internationaal Strafhof (ICC)‘ (maar helaas…..)

‘Guantanamo Bay gevangene (onschuldig) schrijft brief aan VS president Biden‘

‘VS schendt mensenrechten op vreselijke manier: VN eist vrijlating van een gemartelde Guantanamo Bay gevangene‘

‘VS martelde en martelt ‘gewoon’ door op Guantanamo Bay en ook hier geen actie van Internationaal Strafhof (ICC)……..‘ 

‘CIA doodseskaders richten bloedbaden aan onder burgers van Afghanistan: Biden zal deze eskaders ongemoeid laten‘

‘Afghanistan: wie is de terrorist‘

‘VS vermoordde in Afghanistan weer 15 burgers waaronder 3 vrouwen en 3 kinderen…….‘ 

‘Moordenaar van Soleimani komt om bij neerhalen van VS spionage vliegtuig in Afghanistan‘

‘Afghanistan: VS en Afghaans leger bombarderen bruiloftsstoet: 40 burgers vermoord‘

‘BBC met uiterst hypocriete anti-Taliban propaganda‘

‘De Bundeswehr massamoord op 142 Afghanen >> 4 september 2009‘ 

‘Internationaal Strafhof (ICC) stopt na bedreigingen met onderzoek naar VS oorlogsmisdaden…..‘

‘Madeline Albright ‘gegrild’ over illegale interventies en sancties van de VS‘

‘ICC rechter Flügge stapt op vanwege zware dreigementen uit de VS‘

‘NAVO, het grootste militaire verbond maakt zich schuldig aan grootschalige terreur i.p.v. de vrede te bewaren‘

‘Afghanistan: VS gaat terreur vergroten‘

‘VS gaf sinds 2001 meer dan 5,9 biljoen dollar uit aan oorlogen, ofwel: $ 5,933.000.000.000…….‘ (een bericht van november 2018, ofwel dat bedrag ligt nu [in 2021] veel hoger……)    

‘VS
standrechtelijke executies: voor de zoveelste keer niet-verdachten
slachtoffer drone-aanval >> 15 Afghaanse politieagenten
vermoord….‘ 

‘VS
belastingbetalers geven per dag $ 250 miljoen uit aan ‘oorlog tegen
terreur…..’ Daarom moeten wij meer uitgeven aan defensie………..‘ (!!!!) (een bericht uit 2017)

‘Afghaanse oorlog in het 17de jaar: Taliban nu sterker dan eerder sinds de VS de oorlog van 2001 begon‘ 

‘Ten
Broeke (VVD) steunt beslissing Trump de illegale oorlog in Afghanistan
te laten voortduren en zo meer terreur te creëren……..‘ 

‘Afghanistan: de VS stelt de papaverteelt veilig voor de komende jaren………..‘ —————————————————————- 

Meer voorbeelden van VS terreur op grote schaal: ‘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…..)

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

‘List of wars involving the United States‘ 

‘VS: openlijke militaire oefening met terreurgroep in Syrië……‘ 

‘Bang voor Amerika‘ 

‘Guantanamo Bay, de schande van de VS, 10 jaar na de belofte deze illegale gevangenis te sluiten‘

Venezuela: in geheime zitting in Washington is gesproken over een militaire inval

Posted on by Willem Wachtmeester

Nu
blijkt dat alle maatregelen die de VS heeft genomen om de democratisch gekozen president Maduro van Venezuela af te zetten niet werken,
heeft men in de VS blijkbaar besloten tot de ultieme uitoefening van terreur,
een illegale inval.

Hier wat
zaken die de VS heeft geprobeerd en dat al van voor 2002 (toen de VS
een coup in het land probeerde te plegen) met middelen zoals:

  • een
    geheime economische oorlog, gevolgd door ‘officiële’ sancties tegen
    het volk van Venezuela, waarbij zelfs medicijnen op de ‘zwarte
    lijst’ stonden, sancties die Venezuela economisch enorm hebben getroffen

  • het
    voorliegen van de wereld over de toestand in Venezuela, waarbij
    zelfs de woorden honger en moord werden gebruikt

  • het
    bijna platleggen van de Venezolaanse olieproductie (in combinatie
    met de eerder genoemde sancties)

  • het
    stelen van grote hoeveelheden Venezolaanse tegoeden in het
    buitenland, zoals 5 miljard dollar gereserveerd voor de aankoop van
    medicijnen voor het Venezolaanse volk*, NB gestolen door de VS dat een grote
    bek had over de tekorten aan medicijnen in Venezuela, tekorten die de VS zelf
    heeft veroorzaakt met haar economische oorlog tegen het Venezolaanse
    volk……. (al is er al lang geen sprake meer van tekorten aan
    medicijnen)

  • het
    politiseren van humanitaire hulp door Washington, waarvoor deze
    terreurentiteit op de vingers werd getikt door het Rode Kruis en de
    VN….. Waar de VS stelde dat men honger leed in Venezuela en dat er
    geen medicatie voorhanden was, terwijl het Rode Kruis en de VN al
    lang humanitaire hulpgoederen en medicijnen verspreidden onder de
    bevolking….

  • het
    saboteren van de enige elektriciteitscentrale die het land rijk is
    (wat de VS overigens al veel eerder heeft gedaan)

  • in
    feite het plegen van een coup in Venezuela door de voorheen onbekende fascist Guaidó  uit de oppositie, de kandidaat van de VS, uit te roepen tot
    interim president…….

Journalist
Max Blumenthal van The Grayzone Project heeft een lijst toegespeeld
gekregen met een aantal figuren zoals ambtenaren van het VS State
Department (BuZa), ambassade personeel van Colombia en Brazilië,
leden van de Venezolaanse oppositie, plus Vecchio, de zogenaamde nieuwe
ambassadeur van Venezuela, althans een ‘ambassadeur’ van de fascistische Guaidó
kliek…..

Deze
samenkomst vond plaats in het Center
for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS**)
in Washington…..

De schrijver van het hieronder opgenomen artikel, gepubliceerd op Common Dreams en Anti-Media, Eoin Higgins stelt als Blumenthal dan ook volkomen terecht dat het duidelijk is gezien alle
andere uitlatingen van de Trump administratie dat men overweegt om
snel Venezuela binnen te vallen en een eind te maken aan het bewind
van Maduro…….

Mocht
dit gebeuren, staat de wereld een bloedbad te wachten dat we het
laatste jaren niet hebben gezien, natuurlijk uitgezonderd de genocide
in Jemen, die met steun van de VS nog immer voortduurt, terwijl de wereld
toekijkt………

Attendees
of Secret Meeting for ‘US Military Assault’ on Venezuela Revealed

April
15, 2019 at 3:42 pm

Written
by Eoin
Higgins

(CD) – A
group dedicated to regime change in Venezuela held a secret meeting
on overthrowing the country’s government last week, according to
reporting from The
Grayzone Project.

Journalist
Max Blumenthal on Sunday revealed a
list of meeting attendees he obtained over the weekend from a source.

Max Blumenthal

✔@MaxBlumenthal

Exclusive: DC’s @CSIS hosted a who’s who of Trump Latin America advisors for a private roundtable to discuss waging a US military assault on Venezuela. The meeting included the former head of SOUTHCOM, a Colombian general and USAID & NIC officials. https://thegrayzone.com/2019/04/13/us-military-attack-venezuela-trump-csis-invasion/ …


484

7:14 PM – Apr 14, 2019

The
list (in which the meeting is misdated as being on April 20) shows
that the event, held at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C., boasted as
attendees members of the State Department, the Colombian and
Brazilian embassies, members of the Venezuelan opposition, and other
officials in the American national security state.

The
meeting comes after multiple failed attempts to depose the government
of President Nicolas Maduro, who was elected in 2018. The President
Donald Trump administration has made no secret of their intent to see
Maduro gone—but thus far, nothing has worked.

“The
CSIS meeting on ‘Assessing the Use of Military Force in
Venezuela,’” wrote Blumenthal, “suggests that the Trump
administration is exploring military options more seriously than
before, possibly out of frustration with the fact that every other
weapon in its arsenal has failed to bring down Maduro.”

In
the article, Blumenthal gave a brief overview of a number of the
meeting’s more prominent attendees, including Iran-Contra
veteran Roger Noriega and David Smolansky, a Venezuelan national
who works with the right wing Organization of American States (OAS),
a regional organization for the Americas led
in recent years by
hardline Venezuela regime change advocates.

“Few
of these figures are well known by the public, yet many have played
an influential role in U.S. plans to destabilize Venezuela,”
explained Blumenthal.

Also
in attendance was opposition leader Juan Guaidó’s envoy Carlos
Vecchio. Vecchio’s presence at the meeting prompted journalist Anya
Parampil to muse as to whether it was standard operating procedure
for “ambassadors” to solicit invasions of their own countries.

“Since
when do ‘ambassadors’ help plan foreign invasions of their own
country?” asked Parampil.

Anya Parampil

✔@anyaparampil

 · 

Guaidó coup regime tools went to a secret meeting “assessing” military options in VZLA at a weapons industry funded think tank.

If US “officials” explored ways to invade the US from a foreign country, what would we call them? Traitors? @Fmarquez77?https://bit.ly/2UYRfuK

US Military Attack on Venezuela Mulled by Top Trump Advisors and Latin American Officials at…

EXCLUSIVE: Away from the view of the media and public, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) think tank hosted a top-level, off-the-record meeting to explore US military options…

thegrayzone.com

Anya Parampil

✔@anyaparampil

Odd that @carlosvecchio‘s “staff” would attend a private event discussing military force against VZLA, a country they pretend to represent. Since when do “ambassadors” help plan foreign invasions of their own country? Do Guaidó’s “officials” speak for VZLA or Bolton’s wet dream?


99

8:11 PM – Apr 14, 2019

Blumenthal told RT that
his attempts to get attendees on the record about the details of the
meeting were unsuccessful.

“They
were extremely nervous that somebody in the media knew about the
existence of this event,” said Blumenthal. “It was a very
high-level meeting with basically the main people in Washington
involved in making the sausage of Trump’s Venezuela policy and they
wanted to keep it as private as possible.”

The
meeting likely hints at a more aggressive attempt to depose Maduro in
the coming month, Blumenthal added.

“It
really does show that military options are being seriously considered
at this point,” said Blumenthal.

AntiWar writer
Jason Ditz agreed.

“That
the Trump Administration is considering attacking Venezuela as an
option is no secret, as they tell reporters that much at seemingly
every opportunity,” Ditz wrote.
“That they are holding such events to discuss the details, however,
suggest a U.S. war may be closer than anyone realizes.”

WatchBlumenthal’s interview with RT.  (link naar origineel)

RT

✔@RT_com

Secretive meeting on US ‘military option’ in Venezuela reveals key figures of invasion push – report https://on.rt.com/9s8j @GrayzoneProject @MaxBlumenthal


115

8:11 AM – Apr 15, 2019

By Eoin
Higgins / Creative
Commons / Common
Dreams / Report
a typo

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

*  Zie: ‘VS heeft beslag gelegd op 5 miljard dollar van Venezuela voor medicijnaankopen‘


** Het
CSIS, waar Nederland het HCSS heeft, een lobbyorganisatie voor
agressief VS buitenlandbeleid, de NAVO en uiteraard het
militair-industrieel complex, alles onder leiding van opperhufter en
oplichter de luxe Rob de Wijk……

Zie ook:

Max Blumenthal: How US trained Juan Guaido for Regime Change:

The campaign to silence Max Blumenthal:

‘Venezuela: ultieme couppoging van Guaidó mislukt‘

‘Trump vermoordde al 40.000 Venezolaanse burgers‘

‘VS dreigt Rusland, China en Iran met geweld vanwege hulp aan Venezolaanse volk……‘

‘The Monroe Doctrine is Back, and as the Latest US Attack on Cuba Shows, Its Purpose is to Serve the Neoliberal Order‘ (een artikel van CounterPunch)

‘VS legt nog meer sancties op aan de bevolking van Venezuela, Cuba en Nicaragua‘

‘Venezuela is nog lang niet verslagen door de VS‘

‘Venezolaanse regering treft nieuwe regeling voor hulpgoederen van het Rode Kruis, ‘onafhankelijk NOS’ brengt alweer fake news‘

‘Venezuela: onafhankelijke journalisten ontmaskeren leugens over dit land bij presentatie voor de VN‘

‘Venezuela: 15 doden door sabotage elektriciteitsnet‘

‘Venezuela: bijt de VS in haar eigen staart?’

‘Venezuela: het VS volk wordt weer een oorlog in gelogen, zoals eerder in Irak, Libië en Syrië‘

‘Venezuela Aid Live >> Roger Waters (Pink Floyd) terecht tegen benefietconcert‘

‘Venezuela: humanitaire hulp stunt van de VS ingegeven om de kruistocht tegen Maduro een versnelling te geven‘

‘Jill Stein (US Green Party): de VS maakt zich druk over armoede in Venezuela terwijl de armen thuis kunnen doodvallen….‘

‘Venezuela: Abrams vindt een meerderheid in de VN Veiligheidsraad genoeg voor een gedwongen regeringswisseling‘

‘Venezuela: 4 belangrijke zaken aangaande humanitaire hulp waarover de reguliere media niet berichten‘

‘Venezuela zou humanitaire hulp weigeren, het echte verhaal ziet er ‘iets anders’ uit‘ (180 graden anders, wel te verstaan)

‘VS huurlingen bezig met wapentransport gearresteerd in Haïti‘

‘Venezuela: VS bedrijf dat wapens smokkelde is gelinkt aan CIA ‘Black Site’ centra‘

‘Congreslid Ilhan Omar fileert het monster Elliot Abrams, de speciale gezant van de VS voor Venezuela‘

‘Venezuela >> de media willen het socialisme definitief de nek omdraaien‘

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

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

‘Venezolaanse verandering van regime bekokstoofd door VS en massamedia‘

‘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 onderdoet voor de gezamenlijke NAVO troepen… ha! ha! ha! Ook hier is totaal geen bewijs voor deze belachelijke beschuldiging…)

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

‘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………‘

Noord-Koreaans ‘bedrog met nucleaire deal’ is fake news o.a. gebracht door de New York Times

Posted on by Willem Wachtmeester

In
een artikel op The Nation bericht Tim Shorrock over een
artikel in de New York Times, geschreven door David Sanger, éen
‘journalist die in het verleden vaak als bron fungeerde voor lekken over het
VS buitenlandbeleid t.a.v. Noord-Korea (ofwel men lekte officiële documenten naar Sanger).

Deze
Sanger bracht dat artikel in de NYT en daarin wordt gesteld dat Pyongyang zich niet aan de afspraken houdt die met Trump zijn
gemaakt en waarin voorts wordt gesteld dat Noord-Korea nog steeds raketten
ontwikkeld. Een en ander n.a.v. een door de rechtse denktank Center for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS) opgesteld rapport

Uitvoerig
legt Shorrock uit dat het rapport van een enorm ‘fake news’ (nepnieuws) niveau is.
Zo zijn de getoonde foto’s van de sites in Noord-Korea, van 2 maanden
voor de gesprekken tussen Trump en Kim Yung-un………

Bovendien
zo stelt Shorrock, zijn er geen verdragen getekend over het
raketprogramma van Noord-Korea en zoals het in de dagelijkse praktijk
gaat: totdat er zaken zijn getekend gaat men door waar men mee bezig
was, of het nu om de strijd over het bezit van een gebied gaat, of
zoals in dit geval het werken aan middellange- en langeafstandsraketten…….

Lees
het volgende verhaal en intussen een cliché op deze plek: geeft het
ajb door, laat je niet langer besodemieteren door instituten als CSIS
of het Haagse Centrum voor Strategische Studies (HCSS) met hun
oorlogshitserij op basis van leugens en halve en verdraaide waarheden…… Instituten die fungeren als grootlobbyist van het militair-industrieel complex, de NAVO en het uiterst gewelddadige, terroristische buitenlandbeleid van de VS in het groot….. (waar de NAVO onder opperbevel staat van de VS…..)

NUCLEAR
ARMS AND PROLIFERATION
NORTH KOREA MEDIA
BIAS

How
‘The New York Times’ Deceived the Public on North Korea

Stretching
the findings of a think-tank report on Pyongyang’s missile bases is
a reminder of the paper’s role in the lead-up to the Iraq War.

By Tim
Shorrock

NOVEMBER
16, 2018


NYT Headquarters

(Photo
by Haxorjoe at en.wikipedia, CC BY-SA 3.0)

The New
York Times may
still have a Judith Miller problem—only now it’s a David Sanger
problem.

Miller,
of course, is the former Times reporter who
helped build the case for the 2003 US invasion of Iraqwith
a series of reports based on highly questionable sources bent on
regime change. The newspaper eventually
admitted its
errors but didn’t specifically blame Miller, who left the paper
soon after the mea culpa and is now a commentator
on Fox News.

Now,
Sanger, who over the years has been the
recipient of dozens of leaks from US intelligence on
North Korea’s weapons program and the US attempts to stop it, has
come out with his own doozy
of a story that
raises serious questions about his style of deep-state journalism.

The
article may not involve the employment of sleazy sources with an ax
to grind, but it does stretch the findings of the Center
for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS),
a think tank that is deeply integrated with the military-industrial
complex and plays an instrumental role in US media coverage on Korea.

“Controversy
is raging,” South Korea’s
progressive Hankyoreh newspaper declared on
Wednesday about the Times report,
which it called “riddled with holes and errors.”

Sanger’s
story, which appeared on Monday underneath the ominous headline “In
North Korea, Missile Bases Suggest a Great Deception,” focused on a
new study from CSIS’s “Beyond Parallel” projectabout
the Sakkanmol Missile Operating Base, one of 13 North Korean missile
sites, out of a total of 20, that it has identified and analyzed from
overhead imagery provided by Digital
Globe,
a private satellite contractor.

None
of the 20 sites has been officially acknowledged by Pyongyang, but
the network is “long known to American intelligence agencies,”
wrote Sanger.

Sakkanmol,
according to CSIS, “is an undeclared operational missile base for
short-range ballistic missiles” a little over 50 miles (85
kilometers) north of the border and therefore “one of the closest
to the demilitarized zone (DMZ) and Seoul.” Pyongyang’s highly
publicized decommissioning last summer of the Sohae satellite launch
facility “obscures the military threat to U.S. forces and South
Korea from this and other undeclared ballistic missile bases.”

Its
authors added a huge caveat at the end: “Some of the information
used in the preparation of this study may eventually prove to be
incomplete or incorrect.”

But
the Times ignored
the warning and took the report several steps further. According to
Sanger, that analysis of the missile base shows that North Korea is
“moving ahead with its ballistic missile program” despite pledges
made by Kim Jong-Un to President Trump at their Singapore
summit on June 12 to
eliminate his nuclear and missile programs if the United States ends
its “hostile policy” and agrees to forge a new relationship with
North Korea.

The
“new commercial satellite images” of the undeclared missile
sites, Sanger concluded darkly, suggest that North Korea “has been
engaged in a great deception.”

While
North Korea has offered to dismantle a major launching site, he
asserted, it continues “to make improvements at more than a dozen
others that would bolster launches of conventional and nuclear
warheads.” That finding “contradicts Mr. Trump’s assertion that
his landmark diplomacy is leading to the elimination” of the
North’s nuclear weapons and missiles, Sanger concluded.

The
implication was that North Korea, by continuing to build missiles
after the Singapore summit, is lying to the United States and is
therefore untrustworthy as a negotiating partner—and that Trump, by
proclaiming that he has neutralized Kim’s threats, has been
deceived. The Times-CSIS
report was immediately picked up by major media outlets and repeated
almost verbatim on NBC
Nightly News and
NPR, with little additional reporting.

A
leading Democrat, Senator Edward Markey of Massachusetts, seized on
the report to argue that President Trump is “getting played” by
North Korea. “We cannot have another summit with North Korea—not
with President Trump, not with the Secretary of State—unless and
until the Kim regime takes concrete, tangible actions to halt and
roll back its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs,”
he said in
the statement.

But
even a cursory analysis of the imagery should have raised questions.
On Monday night, a Korean
news outlet pointed
out that all the photos analyzed in the CSIS report are dated March
29, 2018—almost two and a half months before Trump
and Kim met in Singapore on June 12.

The
dates make Sanger’s claim that North Korea is “moving ahead” on
missile production after its
pledges to Trump laughable; indeed, they make his story look like a
serious attempt to deceive the American public about the real
progress that has been made in ending the standoff.

In
fact, as discussion swirled on Twitter, it became clear that Sanger
was exaggerating the report. Arms-control experts immediately
questioned his assertions, arguing that he had ignored the fact that
North Korea and the United States have yet to sign any agreement
under which the North would give up its nuclear weapons and missiles.
And in the absence of an agreement, it’s status quo for both North
Korea and the United States.

North
Korea’s missile program “is NOT deception,” Vipin Narang, an
associate professor of political science at MIT, posted soon
after the story was published. Narang, who writes
occasionally for the Times editorial
pageon
North Korea, pointed out that Kim Jong-un has never offered to stop
producing ballistic missiles and in fact had ordered more to be
produced in January 2018.

“Unless
and until there is a deal” with Trump, he wrote, “Kim would be a
fool to eliminate and stop improving [them].… So the
characterization of ‘deception’ is highly misleading. There’s
no deal to violate.” (Like other US analysts, Narang did not
question the CSIS report itself, calling it “excellent.”)

The
CSIS report was denounced by the government of South Korean President
Moon Jae-in as “nothing new,” and Kim Eui-kyeom, its chief
spokesperson, took particular exception to the Times’
use of the term “deception.” To his credit, Sanger acknowledged
the criticism and quoted the statement in full.

“North
Korea has never promised to dismantle its missile bases, nor has it
ever joined any treaty that obligates it to dismantle them,” said
Kim. “So calling this a ‘deception’ is not appropriate. If
anything, the existence of these missile bases highlights the need
for negotiation and dialogue, including those between the North and
the United States, to eliminate the North Korean threat.”

Hankyoreh,
in its analysis, objected to
Sanger’s claim that Sakkanmol and other missile bases are “hidden.”
It reported that South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff had identified
the base as the source for a short-range missile launched by North
Korea on March 10, 2016.

“South
Korean and overseas news outlets at the time dedicated significant
coverage to the launch, noting the presence of an underground Scud
missile base in the Sakkanmol area.”

Leon
Sigal, the author of a book about North Korea and a former member of
the New
York Times editorial
board, sharply disagreed with Sanger’s assertion that North Korea
is now “moving ahead with its ballistic missile program.” Writing
Tuesday in 38
North,
Sigal said the CSIS report notes that “only minor infrastructure
changes were observed” at the missile site since Kim came to power
in December 2011. That’s hardly progress.

Sigal
also noted the absence of a US–North Korea agreement inhibiting the
“deployment of missiles by Pyongyang, never mind requiring their
dismantlement. Nor has Washington yet offered the necessary
reciprocal steps that might make such a deal possible.”

In
a biting comment on his former employer, he added that “substituting
tendentious hyperbole for sound reporting may convince editors to
feature a story on page one, but it is a disservice to readers.”

Taking
note of the response from the Moon government and arms-control
experts, Christine Ahn, the founder of Women Cross DMZ and a strong
advocate for engagement with the North, called on
the newspaper to correct the story. “The @nytimes should write a
retraction,” she said. “They just made real Trump’s allegations
of #fakenews.”

On
Tuesday, as she predicted, Trump used the story to launch another
attack on the media. “The story in the New York Times concerning
North Korea developing missile bases is inaccurate,” he tweeted.
“We fully know about the sites being discussed, nothing new—and
nothing happening out of the normal. Just more Fake News. I will be
the first to let you know if things go bad!”

Less
than two hours later, the Times communications
office put a short statement out on Twitter defending Sanger’s
reporting. “The New York Times stands by our story, which is based
on satellite imagery analyzed by experts,” it stated in a post that
linked to Trump’s earlier blast.

Sanger,
who is interviewed
frequently for
national security conferences and documentaries on North Korea, did
not respond to e-mails asking for comment on his story.


Like
many of his North Korea stories over the years, Sanger’s account of
what he basically described as a betrayal by Kim Jong-un seemed
perfectly timed to interject public skepticism of the North at a
crucial moment for the US negotiations with both Koreas to resolve
the nuclear standoff and pave the way for a final peace settlement on
the Korean Peninsula.


Over
the past month, while the
two Koreas have made spectacular leaps in reducing military
tensions along
their border, the US dialogue with North Korea has stalled. The
primary issues dividing them are Trump’s insistence on keeping his
pressure campaign of economic sanctions in place until the North
denuclearizes, and the North’s demand that Trump join the two
Koreas in publicly declaring an end to the Korean War.


South
Korea has also pushed for such a declaration, saying that it would
assure the North that it can eventually disarm without fear of attack
or invasion from the United States (its position on the end-of-war
declaration has been harshly criticized in Washington, including by
CSIS analysts).

The
differences came into stark relief last week, when North Korea
abruptly canceled a
planned meeting in New York between Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
and North Korean Workers’ Party Vice Chairman Kim Yong-chol. In a
bid to get them back on track, President Moon this week sent his
unification minister, Cho Myoung-gyon, to Washington, where he is
meeting with Pompeo, congressional leaders, and, according to
Yonhap News, top officials at CSIS.

South
Korean officials are confident the
US–North Korea talks will resume, and point to the steps Pyongyang
has taken since the Singapore summit. They include North Korea’s
decommissioning of a major satellite launch facility; its destruction
of the tunnels where its nuclear weapons were tested; its return of
American dead from the Korean War; and its unprecedented cooperation
with South Korea and the US-controlled UN Command to
remove guard posts and firearms in the DMZ.

On
Tuesday, John Bolton, Trump’s hawkish national-security
adviser, toldreporters
in Asia that Trump “is prepared to have a second summit” with Kim
in early 2019. And on Thursday, in a brief meeting in Singapore with
President Moon, Vice President Mike Pence asked that South Korea
“communicate and talk more closely with North Korea” to help
bring this about, Moon’s spokesman told reporters.


The
most glaring problem with the Times story
was Sanger’s characterization of CSIS as a neutral organization (“a
major think tank”) and his failure to disclose that it receives
enormous funding from the US government as well major military
contractors. Nor did he mention that CSIS and its key analysts
provide a kind of anchor to the Times’
coverage of Korea; they often appear near the lead of a story to
explain its political significance. That is particularly true
of Victor
Cha,
one of the authors of the report.

Cha, the director for
Asian affairs at the National Security Council in the George W. Bush
White House, was briefly considered last year by President Trump for
US ambassador to Seoul (apparently his hawkish views weren’t enough
to get him the job).

In
his interview with Sanger for the Times article,
Cha seemed to be pushing for a more aggressive stance against North
Korea. “It’s not like these bases have been frozen,” he said.
“Work is continuing. What everybody is worried about is that Trump
is going to accept a bad deal—they give us a single test site and
dismantle a few other things, and in return they get a peace
agreement” that formally ends the Korean War.

Cha
continued to defend the report as the criticism intensified, and took
special umbrage at South Korea’s response. “How can [South Korea]
defend NK’s undisclosed operational missile bases?” he asked in
a heated exchange on Twitter that caught the attention of Charles
Knight,
an analyst with the Project on Defense Alternatives. “Seriously,
how contorted can these rationalizations for NK weapons possession
get??”

Knight,
in an e-mail, said he had concluded that Cha has been “enabled”
by Sanger and the editors of the Times to
“be the agent of the opening salvo of an offensive by the most
reactionary elements of the US national security and foreign policy
establishment against the Korean diplomacy of both the Trump
administration and South Korea.”

Here’s where the
contractor money that pours into CSIS comes in: Providing the
justification for a tougher policy of sanctions and military threats
would be very much in tune with the defense and intelligence
companies that support the think tank.

According
to the
CSIS page for “corporation and trade association donors,”they
include Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics,
L-3, Rockwell, General Atomics, and Booz Allen Hamilton. CSIS is also
funded by several Asian defense giants, including Japan’s
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and South Korea’s Samsung Electronics
and Korea Aerospace Industries.

All of these companies
have a stake in US military options focused on North Korea, including
monitoring its military activities, building missile-defense systems
and providing weapons, ships, drones, and aircraft for offensive
military operations when they become necessary.

As
I reported in 2017 for Newstapa/The
Korea Center for Investigative Journalism,
“As the South Korean and US militaries have become more integrated
in the face of North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs, CSIS has
become an important forum where military collaboration—especially
on the industrial side—is thrashed out and decided.”

In 2016, for example,
CSIS sponsored a conference on “U.S.-Korea Defense Acquisition
Policy and the International Security Environment” that drew
high-ranking officials from the South Korean government and its
military industry. In opening the conference, CSIS’s CEO John
Hamre, a former Deputy Secretary of Defense, declared, “We’ve
been military partners for 70 years but we are now going to be
business partners in a very new way.”

Digital
Globe, the satellite company that supplied the imagery for the CSIS
report, is not a donor to the think tank. But it has a special
relationship with US intelligence as an important
contractor for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency,
one of the primary collection agencies for the US government.
According to CSIS report, Joseph Bermudez Jr., its primary author, is
a former “senior all-source analyst for DigitalGlobe’s Analysis
Center.”

The
Moon government, while a donor to CSIS, did not seem impressed with
the Digital Globe imagery. In his critique of the Times story,
Moon’s spokesperson Kim Eui-kyeom pointed out that the source for
the CSIS analysis is a “commercial satellite” vendor. “The
intelligence authorities of South Korea and the U.S. have far more
detailed information from military satellites and are closely
monitoring [it],” he said.

In
the end, the Sanger story was widely derided in the circle of people
who closely follow North Korea. Once these doubts were voiced,
both The
Wall Street Journal and The
Washington Post avoided
the Times’
claim of deception and played down its dire conclusions that North
Korea is cheating on the agreement it reached with Trump last June.

That’s a good
development, indicating that Sanger’s questionable scoop probably
won’t mushroom out of control and add fuel to a conflict, as Judith
Miller’s phony reporting did at the advent of the Iraq War. And
Sanger’s role as a leading expert on North Korea and US
intelligence may take a hit.

“In
an age of baseless allegations of fake news devaluing the work of
journalists worldwide, it’s extremely lamentable that the New York
Times—which is meant to be a nuanced and quality outlet—spun the
CSIS story in the egregious way it did,” Chad O’Carroll, the CEO
of Korea Risk Group, a Seoul-based organization that analyzes North
Korea, tweeted on
Tuesday.

Correction:
The passage discussing a Twitter exchange involving Victor Cha and
Charles Knight was garbled in the editing process; it has now been
corrected.

Tim
Shorrock TWITTER
Tim
Shorrock is a Washington, DC–based journalist and the author
of Spies
for Hire: The Secret World of Intelligence Outsourcing.

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

Zie ook:

‘Haags Centrum voor Strategische Studies (HCSS): stelt dat Noord-Korea nog steeds raketten bouwt‘

VS zet definitief in op oorlog met Rusland en VS ambassadeur Hoekstra wil dat Nederland Rusland hard aanpakt v.w. MH17

Posted on by Willem Wachtmeester

Waarschijnlijk
om het volk te laten zien dat hij niets met Rusland heeft en zelfs
geneigd is Rusland aan te vallen, heeft psychopaat Trump, samen met
zijn militaire adviseurs (die hij bijna continu rond zich heeft)
besloten een raketsysteem in Duitsland te stationeren, zodat de VS
niet alleen raketten heeft in Roemenië en Polen…….

De
raketten die in Roemenië en Polen staan maken zogenaamd onderdeel uit
van een raketschild tegen Iran, echter deze raketten staan zo dicht op
de Russische grens, dat Rusland moeite zal hebben ze te
onderscheppen, mocht de VS ze op Rusland afschieten……. 

Je dacht waarschijnlijk dat het hier alleen gaat om antiraketsystemen, echter dat is maar ten dele waar,
deze raketten kunnen in een mum van tijd van (nucleaire) kernkoppen
worden voorzien en dan (uiteraard) als aanvalsraketten worden
ingezet……. Het zou me verbazen als de raketten in Polen en Roemenië al niet zijn uitgerust met kernkoppen….

Mensen,
dat was het nog niet, generaal Scaparrotti heeft ook weer van zich
laten horen en hij stelt dat er veel meer troepen naar Europa moeten,
zelfs troepen die (zogenaamd) terreur bestrijden in het Midden-Oosten, zouden in Europa moeten worden gestationeerd, aldus de oorlogshitser en grootlobbyist van het militair-industrieel complex…..

Ach
ja, de VS heeft ‘slechts’ 60.000 militairen in Europa, althans als
dat er intussen al niet veel meer zijn, immers het Pentagon heeft
carte blanche gekregen van Trump voor het naar eigen inzicht opvoeren
van troepensterkte…… Daarnaast heeft de VS meer dan 300 militaire bases rond een groot deel van Rusland en China……

Oplichter
Scaparrotti stelt dat die troepen nodig zijn om de Russen het hoofd te
bieden, echter van Russische agressie in Europa is geen sprake,
althans als je de leugens van de NAVO, de meeste EU politici en de
reguliere media niet meerekent, geteisem dat de leugens volhoudt dat
De Krim is geannexeerd en dat de Russen in Oost-Oekraïne
zitten…….

De
werkelijke agressor is de VS, dat de NAVO tegen de grens van Rusland
heeft gedrukt, dit is tegen de begin 90er jaren gemaakte afspraken met Sovjet-president Gorbatsjov……. De opstand die in Kiev startte was
voorbereid en werd geregisseerd door de VS, die daarna de Porosjenko
junta installeerde…… Hillary Clinton, destijds minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, is hier één op één verantwoordelijk voor, de hele ‘grap’ (een
enorme oorlogsmisdaad!) heeft de VS maar liefst 4 miljard dollar
gekost…..

Het
is dan ook overduidelijk dat de VS van zins is Rusland aan te vallen,
dan wel de spanningen dermate hoog op te schroeven dat het
militair-industrieel complex op volle toeren kan gaan draaien……
Tja er kan altijd nog een ferme schep bovenop, nietwaar?

Daarover gesproken, de VS ‘ambassadeur’ in ons land, Pete Hoekstra liet bij BNR weten (o.a. in het nieuws van 7.30 u. vanmorgen) dat Nederland zich agressiever moet opstellen tegenover Rusland, dit n.a.v. het neerhalen van vlucht MH17….. Nederland moet zich in de EU harder opstellen en pleiten voor zwaardere sancties tegen Rusland, daarbij verwacht Hoekstra dat de VS Nederland zal steunen….. Nog een uitspraak van Hoekstra, daar komt ‘ie: Nederland moet zorgen dat het North Stream (NS2) project, een pijpleiding vanuit Rusland naar Duitsland (en Nederland) wordt afgeblazen…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Met dat laatste komt de aap uit de mouw: zodat de EU zich afhankelijk maakt van het zwaar gesubsidieerde en voor ons peperdure (LNG) gas uit de VS, gas dat veelal is verkregen uit schaliegaswinning, ofwel gas dat middels enorme milieuschade is gewonnen en middels smerige tankertransporten over de Atlantische Oceaan naar de EU wordt vervoerd…….. Wat een vuile oplichter die Hoekstra!! 

Het eerste artikel hieronder is van Tyler Durden en werd o.a. gepubliceerd op
Anti-Media en Zero Hedge. Het tweede artikel is een korte inleiding
op een video van het Ron Paul Liberty Rapport (zien mensen!):

US
Military Set to Deploy Powerful Anti-Missile Shield in Germany

June
3, 2018 at 10:11 am

Written
by Tyler
Durden

(ZHE) — The
United States is looking to establish a powerful missile shield in
Germany in a potential move that would further inflame tensions with
both Moscow and Tehran.

Though
NATO has long insisted that its missile defense systems are not
directed at Russia, the Kremlin has repeatedly condemned what it sees
as NATO
encroachment in Eastern Europe,
especially after countries like Romania — which is not engaged
in any ongoing conflict with Russia — have recently
installed their
own US-supplied ballistic missile systems, with renewed multi-billion
dollar Patriot missile expansions to follow.

Screenshot
from a U.S.-Germany Anti-Air Missile Live-Fire Exercise In Greece,
November 2017

And
former Warsaw Pact turned NATO member Poland in late 2017 struck
a $10.5
billion missile defense deal with the US.
Also supposedly neutral non-NATO Sweden, which lies close to Russia’s
western and northern borders, last year inked
a $1 billion deal with the US for
the advanced Patriot surface-to-air missile defense system.

So
what are now reported as preliminary
US military and German discussions about boosting European defenses
with the proposed Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)
system in
Germany will no doubt be interpreted as more of the same unnecessary
expansive NATO spending and encroachment on Russia’s borders.

The
talks further come as Europe and the US are at odds over the fate of
the Iran nuclear agreement, with Washington threatening severe
economic punishment for those countries trying to stick it out
through opening trade and energy ties with Iran.

Close
US Middle East ally Saudi Arabia, for example, shocked the world when
news emerged last week that it has ceased
awarding government contracts to German companies over
anger at both Germany staying by the Obama-brokered JCPOA and recent
criticism of Saudi meddling in Lebanese politics by German officials.

The
Pentagon has denied plans to install the advanced THAAD system in
Germany; however, Reuters reports that
US European Command is pushing it in the wake of the White House
pullout from the Iran nuclear deal:

U.S.
European Command has been pushing for a THAAD system in Europe for
years, but the
U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear accord has added urgency to the
issue,
said Riki Ellison, head of the non-profit Missile Defense Advocacy
Alliance.

A
senior German military official cited the need to add more radars
across Europe to
better track and monitor potential threats, and cue interceptors if
needed.

For
Pentagon planners, it is Iran’s Shahab
3 ballistic missiles that
are of most concern in terms of European threat assessment, as they
currently have a
range of 2,000 kilometers, enough to reach southern Europe.

Iran
has considered increasing the range which it is said to be
technologically capable of, but reportedly saw no strategic need in
the wake of the 2015 nuclear agreement, which is now hanging by a
thread.

Iran’s
Shahab 3 might possibly reach southern Europe. Via the AFP.

It
appears German military leaders may be capitalizing
on current US fear-mongering related to the “Iran threat” pushed
by the White House:
“Deploying another U.S. defensive system to Europe could
reassure NATO allies in southern Europe already within striking range
of Iran’s missiles,
said one military official from that region,” according to Reuters,
which further quoted a second source as saying “German
officials were open to the move as a way to better protect civilian
populations.”

As Reuters reports
further, the proposed German THAAD system is set for Pentagon review,
so we could get news of what would be another multi-billion dollar
defense deal for the heart of Europe by
the end of summer:

The
issue may be raised in a new Pentagon missile defense review expected
in early June. The review may draw a closer connection between
missile defense and a
need to deter Russia that was highlighted in the new U.S. national
defense strategy,
said Tom Karako, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS).

One
proposed site for the THAAD system is Ramstein Air Force Base, home
to the headquarters for the U.S. Air Force in Europe and NATO Allied
Air Command.

Meanwhile,
the THAAD system is built by… who
else?… you guessed it… “Lockheed
Martin Corp with a powerful Raytheon Co AN/TPY-2 radar,
to shootdown short-, medium-, and intermediate-range ballistic
missiles” — and both  companies are looking to catch
the multi-billion dollar windfall.

By Tyler
Durden /
Republished with permission / Zero
Hedge / Report
a typo

US
Commander in Europe: We Need More Troops to Fight The Russians

Ron
Paul and Daniel McAdamsMay
30, 2018

US
Commander of the Europe Command, Gen. Curtis M. Scaparrotti, has
called for thousands more US troops to “deter Russian aggression”
in Europe.

He
has even suggested that the US troops should be pulled off of
counter-terrorism duty and sent to Europe. Meanwhile, the Pentagon
announced a massive shipment of military equipment to Europe,
including tanks and other tracked vehicles. Do US military officials
really believe that Russia is about to invade western Europe? Are we
back in the 1940s?

Or
is Washington’s military-industrial complex looking for new ways to
justify an ever-expanding military budget? Tune in to today’s Ron
Paul Liberty Report:

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

Zie ook: ‘Stop militaire transporten van de VS en NAVO richting Russische grens >> niet nog een wereldoorlog!‘

Voor berichten over MH17, klik op dat label, direct onder dit bericht.

Is Putin corrupt? De waarheid over ‘handel en wandel’ van de Russische president (en een nieuwe gifgasaanval in Syrië…..)

Posted on by Willem Wachtmeester

Over Putin worden de meest vreemde dingen verteld, zo zou hij o.a. corrupt zijn en zich zo verrijken middels zijn functie als president van Rusland.

Niet dat men met bewijzen komt waarmee e.e.a. wordt aangetoond, maar dat maakt niet uit, immers Putin is de kwaaie pier en barbertje moet hangen, daarvoor houdt men met grote graagte leugens in de lucht, of die leugens nu van de media, politiek of de geheime diensten komen (leugens die men uiteraard  van elkaar overneemt en steunt door deze te herhalen…)….

Voorlopig heeft Putin voorkomen dat in Syrie de boel niet veel verder escaleerde, neem de belachelijke beschieting van het vliegveld van Homs, na de zoveelste vermeende gifgasaanval van het Syrische leger, die ook in dit geval niet bleek te kloppen…… Vandaag wordt het Syrische leger weer beschuldigd van het aanvallen van doelen in de provincie Idlib met chlorine (chloorgas)…..

BBC World Service meldde rond 11.35 u. (CET) vanmorgen dat het Syrische leger gifgas zou hebben gebruikt bij een aanval in de provincie Idlib. Het bewijs daarvoor? Een woordvoerder van de White Helmets had e.e.a. van horen zeggen, voorts heeft de BBC correspondent Martin Patience ook van alles gehoord, terwijl hij in Beiroet (Libanon) zit……..

De woordvoerder van de White Helmets voerde de haat tegen Syrië verder op, door te stellen dat het in Idlib om veel vluchtelingen gaat die uit Aleppo zijn gevlucht en wel een kwart miljoen mensen……. Het grootste deel van de bewoners van Aleppo is al lang terug, blij dat de fundamentalistische terreurgroepen (‘gematigde rebellen’) niets meer te vertellen hebben in hun stad….. De bedoelde vluchtelingen zijn dan ook voornamelijk families van de terreurgroepen die in Aleppo op basis van de sharia wetgeving, een ware terreur uitoefenden, voordat het Syrische leger de stad weer innam………

De presentator van het BBC programma had het lef te durven zeggen dat (de bewering dat Syrië gifgas heeft gebruikt): “This is proven (to be true….)”

Door naar een ‘wat eerlijker’ verhaal over Putin:

Is
Putin Profoundly Corrupt or “Incorruptible?”

Sharon
Tennison recounts her personal experience of and observations about
Vladimir Putin

By Sharon Tennison

Sharon
Tennison recounts her personal experience of and observations about
Vladimir Putin. first published in 2014 and first appearing on this
site in April 2017, we are re-airing this alternative analysis in the
year of the Russian presidential election as being of continuing
relevance in the struggle to separate truth from #fakenews. Tennison
presents a view of VVP as essentially “incorruptible”. To those
who get their information from the mainstream media, and even from
many alternative news sites this will seem a slightly incredible
idea. Yet Tennison’s opinion is not unsourced or unconsidered. And
the numerous claims of Putin’s massive personal wealth and
“gangster” mentality remain entirely uncorroborated. Where does
the truth lie?

February
04, 2018 “Information
Clearing House” – As the Ukraine situation has
worsened, unconscionable misinformation and hype is being poured on
Russia and Vladimir Putin. Journalists and pundits must scour the
Internet and thesauruses to come up with fiendish new epithets to
describe both. Wherever I make presentations across America, the
first question ominously asked during Q&A is always, “What
about Putin?” It’s time to share my thoughts which follow:

Putin
obviously has his faults and makes mistakes. Based on my earlier
experience with him, and the experiences of trusted people, including
U.S. officials who have worked closely with him over a period of
years, Putin most likely is a straight, reliable and exceptionally
inventive man.

He
is obviously a long-term thinker and planner and has proven to be an
excellent analyst and strategist. He is a leader who can quietly work
toward his goals under mounds of accusations and myths that have been
steadily leveled at him since he became Russia’s second president.

I’ve
stood by silently watching the demonization of Putin grow since it
began in the early 2000s –– I pondered on computer my thoughts
and concerns, hoping eventually to include them in a book (which was
published in 2011). The book explains my observations more thoroughly
than this article.

Like
others who have had direct experience with this little known man,
I’ve tried to no avail to avoid being labeled a “Putin
apologist”. If one is even neutral about him, they are considered
“soft on Putin” by pundits, news hounds and average citizens who
get their news from CNN, Fox and MSNBC.

I
don’t pretend to be an expert, just a program developer in the USSR
and Russia for the past 30 years. But during this time, I’ve have
had far more direct, on-ground contact with Russians of all stripes
across 11 time zones than any of the Western reporters or for that
matter any of Washington’s officials.

I’ve
been in country long enough to ponder on Russian history and culture
deeply, to study their psychology and conditioning, and to understand
the marked differences between American and Russian mentalities which
so complicate our political relations with their leaders.

As
with personalities in a family or a civic club or in a city hall, it
takes understanding and compromise to be able to create workable
relationships when basic conditionings are different. Washington has
been notoriously disinterested in understanding these differences and
attempting to meet Russia halfway.

In
addition to my personal experience with Putin, I’ve had discussions
with numerous American officials and U.S. businessmen who have had
years of experience working with him––I believe it is safe to say
that none would describe him as “brutal” or “thuggish”, or
the other slanderous adjectives and nouns that are repeatedly used in
western media.

I
met Putin years before he ever dreamed of being president of Russia,
as did many of us working in St.Petersburg during the 1990s. Since
all of the slander started, I’ve become nearly obsessed with
understanding his character. I think I’ve read every major speech
he has given (including the full texts of his annual hours-long
telephone “talk-ins” with Russian citizens).

I’ve
been trying to ascertain whether he has changed for the worse since
being elevated to the presidency, or whether he is a straight
character cast into a role he never anticipated––and is using
sheer wits to try to do the best he can to deal with Washington under
extremely difficult circumstances.

If
the latter is the case, and I think it is, he should get high marks
for his performance over the past 14 years. It’s not by accident
that Forbes declared him the most Powerful Leader of 2013, replacing
Obama who was given the title for 2012. The following is my one
personal experience with Putin.

The
year was 1992

It
was two years after the implosion of communism; the place was
St.Petersburg.

For
years I had been creating programs to open up relations between the
two countries and hopefully to help Soviet people to get beyond their
entrenched top-down mentalities. A new program possibility emerged in
my head. Since I expected it might require a signature from the
Marienskii City Hall, an appointment was made.

My
friend Volodya Shestakov and I showed up at a side door entrance to
the Marienskii building. We found ourselves in a small, dull brown
office, facing a rather trim nondescript man in a brown suit.

He
inquired about my reason for coming in. After scanning the proposal I
provided he began asking intelligent questions. After each of my
answers, he asked the next relevant question.

I
became aware that this interviewer was different from other Soviet
bureaucrats who always seemed to fall into chummy conversations with
foreigners with hopes of obtaining bribes in exchange for the
Americans’ requests. CCI stood
on the principle that we would never, never give bribes.

This
bureaucrat was open, inquiring, and impersonal in demeanor. After
more than an hour of careful questions and answers, he quietly
explained that he had tried hard to determine if the proposal was
legal, then said that unfortunately at the time it was not. A few
good words about the proposal were uttered. That was all. He simply
and kindly showed us to the door.

Out
on the sidewalk, I said to my colleague, “Volodya,
this is the first time we have ever dealt with a Soviet bureaucrat
who didn’t ask us for a trip to the US or something valuable!”

I
remember looking at his business card in the sunlight––it
read Vladimir
Vladimirovich Putin.

1994

U.S.
Consul General Jack Gosnell put in an SOS call to me in
St.Petersburg. He had 14 Congress members and the new American
Ambassador to Russia, Thomas Pickering, coming to St.Petersburg in
the next three days. He needed immediate help.

I
scurried over to the Consulate and learned that Jack intended me to
brief this auspicious delegation and the incoming ambassador.

I
was stunned but he insisted. They were coming from Moscow and were
furious about how U.S. funding was being wasted there. Jack wanted
them to hear the”good news” about CCI’s programs that were
showing fine results. In the next 24 hours Jack and I also set up
“home” meetings in a dozen Russian entrepreneurs’ small
apartments for the arriving dignitaries (St.Petersburg State
Department people were aghast, since it had never been done
before––but Jack overruled).

Only
later in 2000, did I learn of Jack’s former three-year experience
with Vladimir Putin in the 1990s while the latter was running the
city for Mayor Sobchak. More on this further down.

December
31, 1999

With
no warning, at the turn of the year, President Boris Yeltsin made the
announcement to the world that from the next day forward he was
vacating his office and leaving Russia in the hands of an unknown
Vladimir Putin.

On
hearing the news, I thought surely not the Putin I remembered––he
could never lead Russia. The next day a NYTarticle
included a photo.

Yes,
it was the same Putin I’d met years ago! I was shocked and
dismayed, telling friends, “This
is a disaster for Russia, I’ve spent time with this guy, he is too
introverted and too intelligent––he will never be able to relate
to Russia’s masses.”

Further,
I lamented: “For
Russia to get up off of its knees, two things must happen: 1) The
arrogant young oligarchs have to be removed by force from the
Kremlin, and 2) A way must be found to remove the regional bosses
(governors) from their fiefdoms across Russia’s 89 regions”.

It
was clear to me that the man in the brown suit would never have the
instincts or guts to tackle Russia’s overriding twin challenges.

February
2000

Almost
immediately Putin began putting Russia’s oligarchs on edge. In
February a question about the oligarchs came up; he clarified with a
question and his answer:

What
should be the relationship with the so-called oligarchs? The same as
anyone else. The same as the owner of a small bakery or a shoe repair
shop.

This
was the first signal that the tycoons would no longer be able to
flaunt government regulations or count on special access in the
Kremlin. It also made the West’s capitalists nervous.

After
all, these oligarchs were wealthy untouchable businessmen––good
capitalists, never mind that they got their enterprises illegally and
were putting their profits in offshore banks.

Four
months later Putin called a meeting with the oligarchs and gave them
his deal:

They
could keep their illegally-gained wealth-producing Soviet enterprises
and they would not be nationalized …. IF taxes were paid on their
revenues and if they personally stayed out of politics.

This
was the first of Putin’s “elegant solutions” to the near
impossible challenges facing the new Russia. But the deal also put
Putin in crosshairs with US media and officials who then began to
champion the oligarchs, particularly Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

The
latter became highly political, didn’t pay taxes, and prior to
being apprehended and jailed was in the process of selling a major
portion of Russia’s largest private oil company, Yukos Oil, to
Exxon Mobil. Unfortunately, to U.S. media and governing structures,
Khodorkovsky became a martyr (and remains so up to today).

March
2000

I
arrived in St.Petersburg. A Russian friend (a psychologist) since
1983 came for our usual visit. My first question was, “Lena
what do you think about your new president?”
She laughed and retorted, “Volodya!
I went to school with him!”

She
began to describe Putin as a quiet youngster, poor, fond of martial
arts, who stood up for kids being bullied on the playgrounds. She
remembered him as a patriotic youth who applied for the KGB
prematurely after graduating secondary school (they sent him away and
told him to get an education).

He
went to law school, later reapplied and was accepted. I must have
grimaced at this, because Lena said:

Sharon
in those days we all admired the KGB and believed that those who
worked there were patriots and were keeping the country safe. We
thought it was natural for Volodya to choose this career.

My
next question was:

What
do you think he will do with Yeltsin’s criminals in the Kremlin?

Putting
on her psychologist hat, she pondered and replied:

If
left to his normal behaviors, he will watch them for a while to be
sure what is going on, then he will throw up some flares to let them
know that he is watching. If they don’t respond, he will address
them personally, then if the behaviors don’t change–– some will
be in prison in a couple of years.

I
congratulated her via email when her predictions began to show up in
real time.

Throughout
the 2000s

St.Petersburg’s
many CCI alumni were being interviewed to determine how the PEP
business training program was working and how we could make the U.S.
experience more valuable for their new small businesses. Most
believed that the program had been enormously important, even life
changing. Last, each was asked:

So
what do you think of your new president?

None
responded negatively, even though at that time entrepreneurs hated
Russia’s bureaucrats. Most answered similarly, “Putin registered
my business a few years ago”.

Next
question:

So,
how much did it cost you?

To
a person they replied, “Putin
didn’t charge anything”.
One said:

We
went to Putin’s desk because the others providing registrations at
the Marienskii were getting ‘rich on their seats.’

Late
2000

Into
Putin’s first year as Russia’s president, US officials seemed to
me to be suspect that he would be antithetical to America’s
interests––his every move was called into question in American
media. I couldn’t understand why and was chronicling these
happenings in my computer and newsletters.

Year
2001

Jack
Gosnell (former USCG mentioned earlier) explained his relationship
with Putin when the latter was deputy mayor of St.Petersburg. The two
of them worked closely to create joint ventures and other ways to
promote relations between the two countries. Jack related that Putin
was always straight up, courteous and helpful.

When
Putin’s wife, Ludmila, was in a severe auto accident, Jack took the
liberty (before informing Putin) to arrange hospitalization and
airline travel for her to get medical care in Finland. When Jack told
Putin, he reported that the latter was overcome by the generous
offer, but ended saying that he couldn’t accept this favor, that
Ludmila would have to recover in a Russian hospital.

She
did––although medical care in Russia was abominably bad in the
1990s.

A
senior CSIS officer I was friends with in the 2000s worked closely
with Putin on a number of joint ventures during the 1990s. He
reported that he had no dealings with Putin that were questionable,
that he respected him and believed he was getting an undeserved dour
reputation from U.S. media.

Matter
of fact, he closed the door at CSIS when we started talking about
Putin. I guessed his comments wouldn’t be acceptable if others were
listening.

Another
former U.S. official who will go unidentified, also reported working
closely with Putin, saying there was never any hint of bribery,
pressuring, nothing but respectable behaviors and helpfulness.

I
had two encounters in 2013 with State Department officials regarding
Putin:

At
the first one, I felt free to ask the question I had previously
yearned to get answered:

When
did Putin become unacceptable to Washington officials and why??

Without
hesitating the answer came back:

The
knives were drawn’ when it was announced that Putin would be the
next president.”

I
questioned WHY? The
answer:

I
could never find out why––maybe because he was KGB.”

I
offered that Bush #I, was head of the CIA. The reply was

That
would have made no difference, he was our guy.

The
second was a former State Department official with whom I recently
shared a radio interview on Russia. Afterward when we were chatting,
I remarked, “You might be interested to know that I’ve collected
experiences of Putin from numerous people, some over a period of
years, and they all say they had no negative experiences with Putin
and there was no evidence of taking bribes”. He firmly replied:

No
one has ever been able to come up with a bribery charge against
Putin.”

From
2001 up to today, I’ve watched the negative U.S. media mounting
against Putin …. even accusations of assassinations, poisonings,
and comparing him to Hitler.

No
one yet has come up with any concrete evidence for these allegations.
During this time, I’ve traveled throughout Russia several times
every year, and have watched the country slowly change under Putin’s
watch. Taxes were lowered, inflation lessened, and laws slowly put in
place. Schools and hospitals began improving. Small businesses were
growing, agriculture was showing improvement, and stores were
becoming stocked with food.

Alcohol
challenges were less obvious, smoking was banned from buildings, and
life expectancy began increasing. Highways were being laid across the
country, new rails and modern trains appeared even in far out places,
and the banking industry was becoming dependable. Russia was
beginning to look like a decent country –– certainly not where
Russians hoped it to be long term, but improving incrementally for
the first time in their memories.

My
2013/14 Trips to Russia:

In
addition to St.Petersburg and Moscow, in September I traveled out to
the Ural Mountains, spent time in Ekaterinburg, Chelyabinsk and Perm.
We traveled between cities via autos and rail––the fields and
forests look healthy, small towns sport new paint and construction.
Today’s Russians look like Americans (we get the same clothing from
China).

Old
concrete Khrushchev block houses are giving way to new multi-story
private residential complexes which are lovely. High-rise business
centers, fine hotels and great restaurants are now common place––and
ordinary Russians frequent these places. Two and three story private
homes rim these Russian cities far from Moscow.

We
visited new museums, municipal buildings and huge super markets.
Streets are in good repair, highways are new and well marked now,
service stations look like those dotting American highways. In
January I went to Novosibirsk out in Siberia where similar new
architecture was noted. Streets were kept navigable with constant
snowplowing, modern lighting kept the city bright all night, lots of
new traffic lights (with seconds counting down to light change) have
appeared.

It
is astounding to me how much progress Russia has made in the past 14
years since an unknown man with no experience walked into Russia’s
presidency and took over a country that was flat on its belly.

So
why do our leaders and media demean and demonize Putin and Russia???

Like
Lady MacBeth, do they protest too much?

Psychologists
tell us that people (and countries?) project off on others what they
don’t want to face in themselves. Others carry our “shadow”
when we refuse to own it. We confer on others the very traits that we
are horrified to acknowledge in ourselves.

Could
this be why we constantly find fault with Putin and Russia?

Could
it be that we project on to Putin the sins of ourselves and our
leaders?

Could
it be that we condemn Russia’s corruption, acting like the
corruption within our corporate world doesn’t exist?

Could
it be that we condemn their human rights and LGBT issues, not facing
the fact that we haven’t solved our own?

Could
it be that we accuse Russia of “reconstituting the USSR”––because
of what we do to remain the world’s “hegemon”?

Could
it be that we project nationalist behaviors on Russia, because that
is what we have become and we don’t want to face it?

Could
it be that we project warmongering off on Russia, because of what we
have done over the past several administrations?

Some
of you were around Putin in the earlier years. Please share your
opinions, pro and con …. confidentiality will be assured. It’s
important to develop a composite picture of this demonized leader and
get the record straight. I’m quite sure that 99% of those who
excoriate him in mainstream media have had no personal contact with
him at all. They write articles on hearsay, rumors and fabrication,
or they read scripts others have written on their tele-prompters.
This is how our nation gets its “news”, such as it is.

There
is a well known code of ethics among us: Is it the Truth, Is it Fair,
Does it build Friendship and Goodwill, and Will it be Beneficial for
All Concerned?

It
seems to me that if our nation’s leaders would commit to using
these four principles in international relations, the world would
operate in a completely different manner, and human beings across
this planet would live in better conditions than they do today.

As
always your comments will be appreciated. Please resend this report
to as many friends and colleagues as possible.

Sharon
Tennison ran a successful NGO funded by philanthropists, American
foundations, USAID and Department of State, designing new programs
and refining old ones, and evaluating Russian delegates’ U.S.
experiences for over 20 years. Tennison adapted the Marshall Plan
Tours from the 40s/50s, and created the Production Enhancement
Program (PEP) for Russian entrepreneurs, the largest ever business
training program between the U.S. and Russia. Running several large
programs concurrently during the 90s and 2000s, funding disappeared
shortly after the 2008 financial crisis set in. Tennison still runs
an orphanage program in Russia, is President and Founder, Center for
Citizen Initiatives, a member of Rotary Club of Palo Alto,
California, and author of The
Power of Impossible Ideas: Ordinary Citizens’ Extraordinary Efforts
to Avert International Crises.
The author can be contacted at sharon@ccisf.org

This
article was originally published by “Off Guardian”
–

Trumps vrede met Rusland weer van de kaart met aanstelling McMaster?

Posted on by Willem Wachtmeester

Donald ‘het beest’ Trump liet tijdens de verkiezingen weten, dat hij de relaties met Rusland wilde verbeteren en ook na zijn verkiezing noemde hij dit nog een paar keer. Intussen blijkt dat Trump zich heeft neergelegd bij de bestaande status quo: de Koude Oorlog 2.0.

Met het aanstellen van generaal McMaster* als nationale veiligheidsadviseur, heeft Trump bevestigd, dat hij zich heeft gevoegd bij de anti-Russische oorlogshitserij in het Pentagon en bij de geheime diensten, zoals de CIA en de NSA……….

McMaster is een oorlogshitser van de eerste orde en liegt dat het gedrukt staat, o.a. over Georgië, De Krim en Oekraïne (zoals u in het artikel hieronder kan lezen).

Hier dat artikel van Anti-Media, gisteren ontvangen (lees en zie ook de artikelen/video onder de links in dat artikel):

Hopes of Peace with Russia Could Be Crushed by Trump’s New National Security Advisor

February 22, 2017 at 10:44 am

Written by Anti-Media News Desk

(RPI)** President Trump has selected Gen. H.R. McMaster to be his National Security Advisor, replacing the short-lived Gen. Michael Flynn. Those breathing a sigh of relief that the rumored favorite John Bolton didn’t get the nod may want to hold that thought — and their breath. McMaster is not the man to guide President Trump toward better relations with Russia and less US interference in the internal affairs of others.

In fact, he believes the opposite.

In a speech*** delivered at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) just last May, Gen. McMaster blamed the lack of sufficient US military presence overseas for what he calls a more aggressive Russian geostrategic posturing.

Said the General:

“Even though it may have been apparent, at least since 2008, that Russia was changing its geostrategic behavior and engaging in…probing, probing at the far reaches of American power, our strategic response was to accelerate our withdrawal of…army forces from Europe. And what we’re seeing now is we’ve awakened to obviously this threat from Russia who is waging limited war for limited objectives. Annexing Crimea. Invading Ukraine. At zero cost. And consolidating gains over that territory, and portraying the reaction by us and partners as escalatory. … What is required is forward deterrence. To be able to ratchet up the cost at the frontier.”

The General also made the completely fallacious assertion that Russia invaded Georgia in 2008. Even the highly critical if not overtly anti-Russia European Union concluded that Georgia was to blame for launching an ill-advised attack on Russian peacekeeping forces that were part of an international mission in South Ossetia.

Does this sound like someone who is going to work to help President Trump improve relations with Russia?

No wonder neocons Max Boot and Sen. John McCain are absolutely thrilled with Trump’s choice of McMaster to be National Security Advisor.

Sen. McCain, who just returned from attacking President Trump at the Munich Security Conference for not being harder on Russia, said today that McMaster:

“…knows how to succeed. I give President Trump great credit for this decision, as well as his national security cabinet choices. I could not imagine a better, more capable national security team than the one we have right now.”

Max Boot had a similar reaction:

“H.R. McMaster is one of the most impressive army officers of his generation—a rare combination of soldier and scholar.”

McMaster’s claim to fame was the 1997 Dereliction of Duty, which is billed as a brave attack on the mistake of the Vietnam war, but was in fact largely focused on the failure to devote enough resources to actually winning the war — a typical neocon critique of failed military interventions.

Is McMaster a worse choice than John Bolton? Perhaps. Whereas Bolton would have been under the microscope, McMaster may just be able, due to his military history, be able to avoid close scrutiny.

Whatever the case, McMaster is all about conflict with Russia. Will his boss keep him in check?

Whatever the case, McMaster is all about conflict with Russia. Will his boss keep him in check?

By Daniel McAdams / Republished with permission / RPI / Report a typo

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

*   McMaster bedankte Trump uitvoerig voor zijn benoeming, terwijl hij vierde keus was…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!



**  RPI: Ron Paul Institute

*** Een toespraak op een conferentie die werd betaald door Rolls Royce Noord-Amerika………. (Rolls Royce bouwt o.a. vliegtuigmotoren…..)