Russische inmenging VS presidentsverkiezingen? ha! ha! ha! ha! Sheldon Adelson en Netanyahu zal men bedoelen!

De
grootste donor van politici in de VS en van de Trump campagne is
niet Rusland, noch heeft Rusland de verkiezingen of het beleid van
Trump kunnen beïnvloeden, nee die grootste donor en manipulator van de VS presidentsverkiezingen en die achter het buitenlandbeleid van de Trump administratie, is zionist en casino
biljonair Sheldon Adelson.

Deze
Adelson is ronduit een ultrarechtse rotploert, zeg maar gerust
fascist, die het liefst Iran zou willen aanvallen met kernraketten,
zelfs zonder enige aanleiding daartoe, zoals hij al eens heeft opgemerkt…….

Met donaties van figuren als Adelson en het ongelofelijk smerig campagne voeren van hare
kwaadaardigheid Hillary Clinton, kon Trump het presidentschap van de VS bemachtigen. Eén en ander heeft Adelson geen windeieren gelegd, hij
heeft zoals gezegd een dikke vinger in de VS buitenlandpolitiek……

Zo heeft
Adelson regelmatig één op één contact met Trump en heeft hij
het voor elkaar gekregen dat de VS haar ambassade naar Jeruzalem
heeft verplaatst (althans een deel van die ambassade)…… Voorts
heeft hij Trump zover gekregen geen humanitaire hulp meer te geven
aan de Palestijnen, die Adelson nog liever vandaag dan morgen zou
willen vernietigen…… Sterker nog: Adelson ontkent domweg dat er
sprake is van Palestijnen, ofwel het zijn ‘gewoon vieze arabieren waar je maar één
ding mee kan doen…..’ (dat laatste heeft hij niet letterlijk gezegd echter dit is wel tussen de regels door te lezen…) De intrekking van het budget voor de VN organisatie t.b.v. Palestijnse vluchtelingen, de UNRWA door Trump, is dan ook te danken aan de inzet van Adelson…..*

Uiteraard
heeft Adelson bij Trump gelobbyd voor vrienden van hem, zoals hare
kwaadaardigheid Nikki Haley, opperploert Mike Pompeo en
oorlogsmisdadiger John Bolton…….

Het zal
je niet verbazen dat Adelson de pest heeft aan democratie, zoals hij
meer dan eens heeft gezegd…..


Vergeet verder niet dat de corrupte Israëlische Palestijnenslachter Netanyahu, in aanloop naar de presidentsverkiezingen, openlijk in het congres anti-Iraanse propaganda mocht oplepelen, waarna hij het advies gaf republikeins te stemmen, daar Obama hem zou hebben laten zitten en dat in een land waar een groot deel van het volk blindelings achter de fascistische apartheidsstaat Israël staat……. Over manipulatie van de verkiezingen gesproken……..

Lees het
volgende artikel van Whitney Webb, eerder gepubliceerd op MintPress
News en door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media. Verbaas je over de
meer dan belachelijke en corrupte politiek in de VS, die in feite van
achter de schermen wordt geleid door figuren als Adelson, de geheime
diensten, het militair-industrieel complex en de bankenmaffia:

The
Biggest Donor in All of US Politics Brings an Israel First Agenda to
Washington

September
28, 2018 at 8:52 pm

Written
by 
Whitney
Webb

(MPN) — According
to publicly available campaign finance data, Sheldon Adelson – the
conservative, Zionist, casino billionaire –is now
 the
biggest spender on federal elections
 in
all of American politics. Adelson, who was the top donor to Donald
Trump’s presidential campaign and the Republican Party in 2016, has
cemented his role as the top political donor in the country after
giving $55 million in recent months to Republicans in an effort to
help the party keep its majority in both houses of Congress.

Adelson’s
willingness to help the GOP stay in power is likely born out of his
desire to protect the massive investment he placed in the party last
election cycle. In 2016, the Republican mega-donor
 gave
heavily
 to
the Trump campaign and Republicans, donating $35 million to the
former and $55 million to the top two Republican Super PACs — the
Congressional Leadership Fund and the Senate Leadership Fund —
during that election cycle.

Adelson’s
decision to again donate tens of millions of dollars to Republican
efforts to stay in power is a direct consequence of how successfully
Adelson has been able to influence U.S. policy since Trump and the
GOP rode to victory in the last election cycle.

New
York Times
 article
on Adelson, titled “
Sheldon
Adelson Sees a Lot to Like in Trump’s Washington
,”
notes that Adelson “enjoys a direct line to the president.”
Furthermore, Adelson and Trump regularly meet once a month “in
private in-person meetings and phone conversations” that Adelson
has used to push major changes to U.S. policy that Trump has made
reality — such as moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to
Jerusalem and cutting aid to Palestinian refugees, among others.

Adelson’s
new title as the top spender in all U.S. elections shows that he,
along with his wife, is willing to spend big to keep that direct line
open in the months and years ahead. Citing sources close to the
Adelsons, 
the Times writes that
the Adelsons’ massive expenditures in federal elections this cycle
are being made because he and his wife believe that “Republican
control of the House and the Senate is so vital to maintaining these
[right-wing and pro-Zionist] policies” and their influence in
Washington and at the White House.

Pleased
as Punch”

The
fact that Adelson is “
pleased-as-punch
with Trump’s performance as president should hardly come as a
surprise, given that the president has fulfilled his campaign
promises that were of prime importance to Adelson, while many of his
other campaign promises – namely those that were populist or
anti-war in nature – have rung hollow.

These
Adelson-promoted policies include the moving of the U.S. embassy in
Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which Adelson had aggressively
promoted and even 
helped
to finance
,
as well as
 removing the
U.S. from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), better
known as the Iran nuclear deal. Another recent policy move bearing
Adelson’s fingerprints is the U.S. decision to withdraw its funding
for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees
(UNRWA), as Adelson
 once
infamously stated
 that
“there’s no such thing as a Palestinian.”

As
previously mentioned, 
The
New York Times
 recently
noted
 that
the cutting of aid to Palestinians, the U.S.’ removal from JCPOA,
and the Jerusalem embassy move all resulted from private
in-person meetings and phone conversations between Adelson and Trump.

Adelson
has also been successful in stocking the Trump administration with
politicians he has long supported as well as his confidantes.
Adelson-supported appointees include Nikki Haley,
 long-time
recipient
 of
Adelson campaign funds who now serves as
 U.S.
ambassador to the UN
;
Mike Pompeo, former CIA director who has advocated for
 bombing
Iran
 and
now serves as
 secretary
of state
;
and John Bolton, a
 close
confidante of Adelson
,
who is now national security adviser.

Adelson
was
 also
instrumental
 in
removing Pompeo and Bolton’s predecessors, Rex Tillerson and H.R.
McMaster, from their respective posts, owing to their support for
JCPOA and their alleged
 “anti-Israel”
positions
.
Speculation has recently grown that Secretary of Defense James
Mattis
 may
share their fate
 for
similarly opposing Adelson’s positions.

Yet,
upon closer examination, these Adelson-driven personnel and policy
moves enacted by Trump seem to merely be the foundation for the
so-called “
Adelson
agenda
,”
a set of convergent goals that could potentially result in thousands
of deaths in the Middle East and embroil the U.S. in yet another
regime-change war.

To
Show That “We Mean Business”

While
Adelson’s top-donor status has allowed him unprecedented access to
the Trump administration and has resulted in dramatic changes to U.S.
policy, there is every indication that the worst is yet to come. This
is because, while the Adelson’s past efforts to influence Trump
administration policy have had undeniably negative effects, they have
yet to embroil the U.S. in another regime-change war or lead to the
destruction of entire nations.

Yet,
the current path the administration is treading at Adelson’s behest
— particularly regarding Iran, Syria and Palestine — has the
potential to unleash havoc in the Middle East and beyond, in a way
not yet seen during Trump’s young presidency.

Indeed,
one need only look at Adelson’s past statements on Iran to
understand just how dangerous this man’s influence is to any
prospect of peace in the Middle East.

As
an example, during the negotiations that eventually led to the Iran
nuclear deal, 
Adelson
publicly advocated
 for
a U.S. nuclear attack on Iran 
without
provocation, 
so
the U.S. could “impose its demands [on Iran] from a position of
strength.”

More
specifically, Adelson’s “negotiation” plan involved the U.S.
dropping a nuclear bomb in the middle of the Iranian desert and then
threatening to drop “the next one […] in the middle of Tehran”
to show that “we mean business.” Tehran, Iran’s capital, is
home to nearly 9 million people with 15 million more in its suburbs.
Were Tehran to be attacked with nuclear weapons,
 an
estimated 7 million
 would
die within moments.

Furthermore,
any sort of diplomatic engagement with Iran, 
according
to Adelson
,
is “the worst negotiating tactic I could ever imagine.”

In
other words, Adelson’s vision for engaging Iran considers the
dropping of nuclear weapons on a country, including its heavily
populated capital city — for no reason other than to show that the
U.S. “means business” — a reasonable tactic.

With
the Trump administration now applying “maximum pressure” to Iran,
Adelson’s vision for engaging the Islamic Republic is of critical
importance. For instance, if this “maximum pressure” campaign —
currently a combination of draconian sanctions, bullying Iran’s
trading partners, and covert CIA-driven regime-change operations —
ultimately fails, Adelson is likely to push Trump towards more
drastic “negotiation” tactics in order to force Iran into a “new
treaty” designed by and for pro-Israel interests that seek to
eliminate Iran as a regional player. Given that many entities–
including Europe, China and Turkey — are rejecting U.S. calls to
isolate Iran, this is a likely scenario that must be considered.

As
his past statements make clear, Adelson — in such a case — is
likely to pressure Trump to use military tactics, such as preemptive
bombings, to force Iran to yield. Even though such a move would
likely embroil Iran, the U.S. and potentially other important nations
in a major war, Trump has shown that he has so far been willing to
take Adelson’s “advice” regardless of consequences, including
international backlash or even war.

Meet
Your New Overlord: Adelson Driving Both US and Israeli Policy Behind
the Scenes

Beyond
the fact that Adelson’s unprecedented influence on U.S. politics is
set to create much more instability than past policies he has
promoted, lies another unsettling truth: for less than $150 million —
pocket change for such a plutocrat — Adelson has effectively bought
the presidency and Congress. His role as top political donor has
given him a “direct line” to the president and unprecedented
access to the Republican party, who are beholden to his desires and
whims as their paymaster.

Indeed,
crossing Adelson — as shown by the high-profile firings of McMaster
and Tillerson — has its steep price, and obeying Adelson now seems
to be the most essential step that Trump and other Republicans must
follow to stay in power.

Furthermore,
Adelson is also 
the
primary driver
 behind
Israeli policy, given his role as a key donor to and long-time backer
of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and his role as 
owner
and funder
 of
Israel’s most widely circulated Hebrew-language newspaper, 
Israel
Hayom
.
Thus, when considering critiques of U.S. politics as unduly
influenced by Israel, Adelson’s role is again clear as day. If
Israel is driving the U.S.’s foreign policy, it is not only because
Adelson wills it but because Adelson is 
personally
driving the policies of 
both the
U.S. and Israel
.

In
2014, a Princeton University study 
demonstrated
that
 —
beyond any doubt — the U.S. is an oligarchy, beholden to the
interests of the rich and the powerful, not the interests of the
majority of its citizens. Though the presence and power of the
oligarchy is nothing new, what is notable is that a massive chunk of
it is now under the control of a single individual — a man who has
repeatedly shown that he has no empathy or respect for human life and
is 
entirely
on board 
 with
totalitarianism. Indeed, Adelson has made it clear 
time
and again
 that
he is no fan of democracy.

Americans,
meet your new, unelected overlord — Sheldon Adelson — because, as
long as the U.S. political system is “
hostage
to his fortune
,”
he’s not going anywhere.

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

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

* Zie wat betreft UNRWA ook:

‘Israëlische helden’ schieten 6 ongewapende Palestijnse demonstranten dood op Gazaans grondgebied, inclusief 2 jongens van 12 en 14 jaar oud…..

Jonathan Chandler (Foundation for Defense of Democracies): Palestijns beroep op vluchtelingenstatus staat vrede in Israël in de weg….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

VS onder Trump >> een nog grotere stimulator van Israëlische terreur

Voor de verkiezingen in de VS:

Trump (Republikeinen) wint de midterm verkiezingen, alsook de Democraten, het verschil voor mensen elders in de wereld, die onder VS terreur moeten leven, is nul komma nada…….

Russiagate sprookje ondermijnt VS democratie en de midterm verkiezingen‘ (zie ook de links in dat bericht)

Politico rapport bevestigt: Russiagate is een hoax

De Israëlische manipulatie van de VS presidentsverkiezingen, gaat veel verder dan wat men Rusland in de schoenen schuift…..

‘Russiagate’: Intel-raport over Russische bemoeienis met verkiezingen opgebouwd met leugens en is politiek gemotiveerd, aldus Matlock, voormalig VS ambassadeur in Moskou

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

Trump
heeft vorig jaar meermaals aangedrongen op een militaire invasie van
Venezuela. Veel ophef over dit bericht dat naar buiten werd gebracht
door een hoge ambtenaar. Associated Press (AP) bracht een rapport uit over deze zaak. Onbegrijpelijk dat men hier nog van opkijkt als
je het aantal illegale invasies van de VS ziet sinds 1945…..*

Aan
de andere kant is het goed voor de mensen die de VS nog steeds als de
grote broer zien, de grote broer die ‘optreedt tegen onrecht’ en ‘zich inzet voor de verspreiding van democratie’, immers
zo worden de grootschalige terreuracties van de VS voorgesteld…. Terwijl tijdens het ingrijpen van de VS sinds 1945 tot nu al ruim meer dan
22 miljoen mensen werden vermoord, waar de aangevallen landen voor het overgrote deel in grote chaos achterbleven……..

Wat
betreft Venezuela is het extra wrang, immers de VS voert al jaren een
economische oorlog tegen dat land, waardoor het leven steeds
moeilijker wordt…… ‘Lullig’ voor de VS, maar de
mensen die het hardst worden getroffen door de economische oorlog van de VS, de
grote onderlaag, stemden ook bij de laatste verkiezingen dit jaar massaal
op Maduro!

Wat betreft de sancties: het economische oorlog voeren tegen een land dat niet
blindelings de orders van de VS volgt, moet tot een opstand leiden, een opstand die moet uitmonden in een staatsgreep, dit is een
lang beproefd wapen van de VS, echter niet altijd met het beoogde
succes >> een coup…… Zo mislukte dit in Syrië, vandaar ook dat de VS
bases inricht in Syrië, daar dit land van groot strategisch belang is
voor de VS oliemaffia en terreurstaat Israël…….

De uiterst agressieve NAVO terreurorganisatie heeft intussen een militaire basis in Colombia, in de buurt van de Venezolaanse grens en dat mede op kosten van de belastingbetaler, ook die in Nederland……. Dan durft het geteisem van het kabinet Rutte 3 en een groot deel van de Kamer, keer op keer te zeuren over de te lage inspanningen van Nederland op het gebied van Defensie uh Oorlogsvoering……… (waar men godbetert de peperdure militaire missies in landen waar Nederland niets te zoeken heeft, voor een groot deel betaalt uit andere dan het oorlogsbudget of zoals men dat eufemistisch noemt: het ‘defensiebudget’)

Nu
is de VS naast Venezuela ook bezig met een economische oorlog tegen
Iran…… Vergeet niet dat door de VS sancties tegen Irak, ‘maar liefst’ 500.000 kinderen om het leven zijn gekomen, ofwel vermoord door de VS…… Over deze massamoord door de VS durfde Madelein Albright, destijds VS minister van BuZa en oorlogsmisdadiger, te zeggen dat het offer, dus de dood van een half miljoen kinderen, het doel waard was……. Dat Albright t.z.t. een uiterst langdurige en pijnlijke doodstrijd mag ondergaan (en dan terugdenkt aan de dood van al die kinderen), wat een fascistisch, psychopathisch tyfuswijf! 

De hoogste tijd dat een
economische oorlog wordt gezien als een ontoelaatbare inmenging in de
binnenlandse aangelegenheden van een soeverein land en als een volwaardige oorlogsmisdaad!!

Trump
Pushed for US Military Invasion of Venezuela: Report

July
4, 2018 at 10:01 am

Written
by 
Jon
Queally

(CD— Surrounded
by his top military aides in a White House meeting less than a year
ago, the 
Associated
Press
 on
Wednesday 
reports that
President Donald Trump wanted to know why the U.S. military couldn’t
“just simply invade” the country of Venezuela.

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro speaks to the media following a meeting with UN chief Ban Ki-moon at the United Nations (UN) headquarters in New York on July 28, 2015 in New York City. Maduro is in New York to speak with the UN about his country’s escalating border dispute with Guyana. (Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Based
on the account of “a senior administration official familiar with
what was said,” 
AP reports
that the president’s comments “stunned” those at the meeting,
including U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and national security
adviser H.R. McMaster, both of whom have now left the administration.

From AP:

In
an exchange that lasted around five minutes, McMaster and others took
turns explaining to Trump how military action could backfire and risk
losing hard-won support among Latin American governments to punish
President Nicolas Maduro for taking Venezuela down the path of
dictatorship, according to the official. The official spoke on the
condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the
discussions.

But
Trump pushed back. Although he gave no indication he was about to
order up military plans, he pointed to what he considered past cases
of successful gunboat diplomacy in the region, according to the
official, like the invasions of Panama and Grenada in the 1980s.

While
some of those around him continued attempts to ignore or dissuade the
president, reportedly Trump could not let the idea go and AP cites
“two high-ranking Colombian officials” who confirmed that he
brought the idea of a military overthrow up with Colombian President
Juan Manuel Santos during a closed-door meeting in August of 2017.

While
some of those around him continued attempts to ignore or dissuade the
president, reportedly Trump could not let the idea go and AP cites
“two high-ranking Colombian officials” who confirmed that he
brought the idea of a military overthrow up with Colombian President
Juan Manuel Santos during a closed-door meeting in August of 2017.

The Rude Pundit@rudepundit

Happy Independence Day. Our fucking madman in the White House really wants to go to war in Venezuela. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/trump-pressed-aides-about-venezuela-invasion-official-tells-ap-n888816 


Trump reportedly pressed aides about Venezuela invasion

When asked about the report, a National Security Council spokesman said the U.S. will consider all options to help restore Venezuela’s democracy.

nbcnews.com

A
month later, during a dinner with other Latin American leaders on the
sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly meeting in New York, the
reporting says that Trump—despite warnings not to do so—once more
brought up the subject.

The
U.S. official said Trump was specifically briefed not to raise the
issue and told it wouldn’t play well,” AP reports, “but the
first thing the president said at the dinner was, ‘My staff told me
not to say this.’ Trump then went around asking each leader if they
were sure they didn’t want a military solution, according to the
official, who added that each leader told Trump in clear terms they
were sure.  Eventually, McMaster would pull aside the president
and walk him through the dangers of an invasion, the official said.”

By Jon
Queally
 / Creative
Commons
 / Common
Dreams
 / Report
a typo

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

* Zie: ‘VS buitenlandbeleid sinds WOII: een lange lijst van staatsgrepen en oorlogen……….‘ en:  ‘List of wars involving the United States

Zie ook:

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……..

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

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

VS zet Latijns-Amerikaanse landen tegen elkaar op en is bezig met voorbereiding invasie Venezuela

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Venezuela: Target of Economic Warfare

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


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

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

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

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

Venezuelans in the Streets to Support Constituent Assembly

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

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

Rondje Venezuela schoppen op Radio1………

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

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

PS: de kans op een invasie van de VS in Venezuela was ook onder ‘vredesduif’ en oorlogsmisdadiger Obama bepaald niet ondenkbaar………

John Bolton, nationaal veiligheidsadviseur, alsof de duivel zelf is benoemd……..

Mensen
ik had het bericht, waarin wordt ‘gesproken’ over de vervanging van figuren rond het beest
Trump, ‘nog niet gepubliceerd’
* of men maakte bekend dat
McMaster, zelf al een enorme ploert van formaat, werd  afgezet door
het beest, om plaats te maken voor John Bolton, ofwel de duivel
zelf….. (zo niet dan toch één van diens trouwste medewerkers…)

Bolton
schreef onlangs ‘geheel toevallig een’ opiniestuk’ in de Wall Street Journal
dat de VS Noord-Korea moet aanvallen…. uit zelfbehoud!!! ha! ha!
ha! ha! ha! Alsof Noord-Korea ooit ook maar een miljoenste van een
seconde een gevaar is geweest voor de VS……. Ja ik lach wel, maar
deze opperploert is werkelijk een gevaar voor de hele wereld…….

Alsof
je een oorlogsmisdadiger, die je minstens als terrorist moet zien,
minister van defensie maakt…. Oh ja, deze benoeming is in feite nog erger…!!

Bolton
is één van de hoofdverantwoordelijken voor de illegale oorlog tegen
Irak, waar hij de massavernietigingsfabel bleef herhalen als
ambassadeur bij de VN……… Al moest je ofwel een topidioot zijn
om dit te geloven, dan wel een kwaadaardige collaborateur van de VS, of lobbyist van andere westerse regeringen zijn die achter deze illegale oorlog stonden (zoals de reguliere westerse media….)…. Hoewel een lobbyist van het militair-industrieel complex, of een combi van het e.e.a. heel goed mogelijk is………

Met
Pompeo, een andere opperschoft op Buitenlandse Zaken, een groot
voorstander van oorlog tegen Iran en Noord-Korea, laat zich raden wat
er op het ‘menu staat…..’ (één of het liefst twee illegale oorlogen,
misschien zelfs met het gebruik van ‘tactische’ kernwapens, zodat deze getest kunnen worden in de praktijk…….)

Ik
hoef je niet te vertellen wat hiervan het gevolg zal zijn….. Och,
waarom ook niet: Rusland zal dit zeker niet pikken en waarschijnlijk
zal China al evenmin op de handen blijven zitten, ofwel
WOIII zal dan een voldongen feit zijn………

Hoe
is het mogelijk dat de westerse media zo relatief gelaten reageren op
deze laatste benoemingen…..??? Ach ja, die zien niet eens de
grootschalige terreur die de VS uitoefent op een explosief deel van
de wereld….. Sterker: nog steeds durft men daar niet te stellen
dat de VS meehelpt aan een genocide op de sjiitische bevolking van
Jemen……

Darius Shahtahmasebi noemt Bolton America’s Worst Nightmare, ik zou een stap verder willen gaan en hem daarom de ergste nachtmerrie voor de wereld willen noemen…..

America’s
Worst Nightmare

March
23, 2018 at 11:45 am

Written
by 
Darius
Shahtahmasebi

(ANTIMEDIA Op-ed) — John
Bolton’s inclusion in the Trump administration as Donald Trump’s
new national security advisor is nothing short of a nightmare.

Bolton,
a former U.N. ambassador under George W. Bush, will be replacing
General H.R. McMaster as Trump’s national security advisor, who
replaced former “disgraced” national security advisor Michael
Flynn. When the president struck a Syrian airbase in April 2017, it
was McMaster who drew up and briefed Trump on the
 strike
proposals
,
one of which was
 reportedly
very extensive
.

McMaster
was also
 reportedly one
of the main backers of a secret plan to give North Korea’s Kim
Jong-un a “bloody nose strike,” a limited strike to dismantle its
nuclear ambitions without risking an all-out war.

However,
despite this, it appears McMaster wasn’t hawkish enough for Donald
Trump’s needs. While McMaster
 publicly
berates Iran
 and
North Korea on a regular basis, he persistently warned against
Trump’s plan to completely derail the Joint Comprehensive Plan of
Action (JCPOA) formed with Iran in 2015. He also later
 denied the
claims that the Trump administration was looking to deliver the
“bloody nose strike” on North Korea, perhaps indicating he was
not completely on board with the idea after all (or had decided
otherwise at that particular juncture in history).

Enter
John Bolton. Less than month ago, he wrote an op-ed article published
by the 
Wall
Street Journal 
(WSJ) entitled “The
Legal Case for Striking North Korea First” — an idea so bad, it
seems, that about a week later, the 
WSJ published
a counter viewpoint simply entitled “Striking North Korea First Is
a Bad Proposal.”

In
Bolton’s short-sighted op-ed — aside from the fact that he offers
no real legal analysis at all (those who do consider it a legal
analysis must explain why the argument of preemptive self-defense
applies to the U.S. but not to North Korea, which faces American
aggression near
its borders on a routine basis) — it’s also quite telling that he
relies on the evidence of CIA Director Mike Pompeo, who 
alleged in
January that Pyongyang was only “a handful of months” away from
being able to strike the American mainland with nukes.

It
is no coincidence that next in line for Donald Trump’s secretary of
state position is Pompeo himself.

Together,
Bolton and Pompeo will be able to advise Trump on anti-North Korean
and anti-Iranian platforms so hawkish there is no telling what’s to
come (though we have a fairly decent idea).

As
some of you may know, John Bolton’s hawkishness has already led to
some of the most despicable 
foreign
policy agendas
 of
our generation.

We
are confident that Saddam Hussein has hidden weapons of mass
destruction and production facilities in Iraq,”
 Bolton
famously
 said in
2002 while serving as President George W. Bush’s undersecretary of
state for Arms Control and International Security. He also called
Hussein a “threat to the region” and claimed he needed to be
“disarmed.”

But
the end of the story is clear here. And if Saddam Hussein does not
co-operate we have made it clear this is the last chance for him…I
think the Iraqi people would be unique in history if they didn’t
welcome the overthrow of this dictatorial regime,”
 he
added.

Even
when this rationale for invading Iraq and destabilizing an entire
region turned out to be one of the worst editions of “fake news”
ever to sting the planet, in 2015 – some 12 years later – Bolton
still 
claimed the
Iraq War was worth it and said that, conversely, the worst decision
involving Iraq was the “
2011
decision to withdraw U.S. and coalition forces.

In 2016, he then
 changed
his mind
 to
say that the only mistake of the Iraq War was that the U.S. did not
get rid of Saddam Hussein sooner.

If
John Bolton leads the cheers to invade Iran or North Korea, who will
hold him accountable?

Apparently
having learned no lessons at all from the criminal invasion of Iraq,
Bolton also wrote a 
New
York Times
 op-ed entitled
“To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran” in 2015. He made it quite
clear that “only military action” could accomplish what was
required to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. In Bolton’s
eyes, the JCPOA doesn’t cut it.

He
also openly
 called
for the assassination
 of
Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, only to later condemn
the
 Obama
administration
 for
doing just that (an invasion is bad if a Democrat does it, and 
vice
versa, of course
,
depending on who you are running against).

John
Bolton is also a
 strong
anti-Russian
,
drone-warfare
 supporting imperialist
who once also appeared to call
 for
the invasion of Cuba
.

He
is now going to be advising Donald Trump, a seventy-one-year-old
 mass
murdering
 narcissist
 with
an attention span of
 two
to four minutes
,
on matters of national security.

Op-ed
Creative
Commons
 / Anti-Media / Report
a typo

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

*
Zie: ‘Wereld Oorlog III: is deze nog te ontwijken?‘ 

Zie ook: ‘NEOCONS ARE BACK WITH A BIG WAR BUDGET AND BIG WAR PLANS‘ (een column van Ron Paul, overgenomen van Stan van Houcke)

        en: ‘Noord-Korea en de VS: de planning van de VS om Rusland en China aan te vallen met kernraketten……..

        en: ‘Wereldoorlog III: is deze nog te ontwijken?

        en: ‘John Bolton heeft beloofd dat Iran voor 2019 onder een ander regime zal leven…….

        en: ‘VS nu definitief op oorlogspad tegen China…..

        en: ‘Netanyahu en Bolton stoken het vuur in het Midden-Oosten verder op: Iran moet en zal vallen…..

       en: ‘Trump beloofde geen extra oorlog in het Midden-Oosten >> toch heeft hij het pad vrijgemaakt voor oorlog tegen Iran……‘  

Wereldoorlog III: is deze nog te ontwijken?

Alle
tekenen wijzen naar een komend groot conflict >> het samenspannen van de VS en
haar (andere) slaafse westerse landen tegen Rusland, Syrië en Iran, plus
natuurlijk China en Noord-Korea, gesteund middels een enorme propaganda van de westerse media, zorgt ervoor dat er niet veel nodig is of we
zitten middenin WOIII…… Wat betreft China en Noord-Korea: daar
zijn nog geen officiële NAVO oefeningen gehouden, al zijn de spanningen er daar niet minder om…. (hoewel Australië, Nieuw-Zeeland en de Filipijnen natuurlijk ook een soort NAVO bondgenoot zijn*) Neem de alweer grote militaire oefening van Zuid-Korea en de
VS langs de grenzen en territoriale wateren van Noord-Korea……
Tijdens de Spelen kon de wereld even ademhalen en toenadering tussen
de 2 Korea’s was even een feit…..

De
Spelen zijn nog niet afgelopen of de VS kondigt aan dat de grote
jaarlijkse militaire oefening ‘gewoon’ doorgaat…..
Blijkbaar heeft de VS Moon Jae-in, de Zuid-Koreaanse president en de Zuid-Koreaanse regering dusdanig onder druk gezet dat men toestemde in het laten doorgaan van
die oefeningen, militaire oefeningen die de Noord-Koreanen al
decennia lang steken, maar waar vooral de VS niet van af wil zien…….. Tja,
zeg nu zelf, ‘wat is belangrijker’, een voor de winsten en macht van het militair-industrieel
complex en de macht van de VS te houden grootschalige militaire
oefening, of vrede?? Vrede is (blijkbaar) voor dombo’s……

Niet
alleen de agressie tegen landen als Syrië, Rusland, Iran, China en
Noord-Korea wijzen in de richting van WOIII, maar met de wisselingen
aan de top van de Trump administratie, kan het bijna niet anders of we stevenen af op een grootschalige oorlog……. De
ene psychopathische houwdegen van die administratie na de andere wordt op straat gezet, waarvoor in de plaats psychopaten worden ingezet die nog een fikse portie kwaadaardiger zijn……… De VS heeft zelfs gesteld dat een aanval met conventionele wapens (dus niet met kernwapens) op bevriende landen niet wordt uitgesloten, een aanval gericht op de bevolking en infrastructuur van die bevriende landen………

Darius
Shahtahmasebi noemt het niet in het volgende artikel, maar er ligt ook nog eens een enorme Himalaya aan VS schulden, het is dat de munt van de VS een internationaal betaalmiddel is en bijvoorbeeld de olieprijs in
dollars wordt uitgedrukt, anders zou het er wel eens heel anders uit
kunnen zien voor de VS en haar onafzienbare schuldenlast……

Vreemd
trouwens dat een land als China zulke enorme voorraden dollars heeft,
als dit land deze op de markt dumpt, kan de VS financieel
inpakken….. Dan blijft de vraag over wat goed is voor een land met enorme schulden? Juist,
oorlog!! Vandaar ook dat de geldpersen in de VS overuren maken…..
Het zou me trouwens niet verbazen als China de dollar niet eens durft
te dumpen als betaalmiddel (valuta om mee te investeren)……. Gezien
deze zaak zijn de agressieve woorden van Trump over een importheffing op Chinees
staal en aluminium nog vreemder…….. Blijkbaar wil hij
daarmee zeggen schijt te hebben aan China en haar enorme
dollarvoorraad………

Het
vorige voorbeeld is nog meer van belang, immers China en Rusland
hebben al een paar keer gesproken over een ander internationaal
betaalmiddel dan de dollar. Khadaffi wou de olie dollar inruilen voor
de gouden dinar, een munt waarvan de tegenwaarde altijd in goud
aanwezig zou zijn, één van de redenen voor de illegale oorlog van de
VS en haar oorlogshond NAVO tegen Libië…….. (de enorme goudvoorraad van Libië is tijdens de illegale oorlog van de VS en andere NAVO lidstaten tegen dit land ‘verdwenen….’)

Zo bezien is WOIII eigenlijk niet meer te ontwijken…….

A
World War Might Sound Crazy, but It Could Be America’s Last Act of
Desperation

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor A World War Might Sound Crazy, but It Could Be America’s Last Act of Desperation

March
19, 2018 at 12:10 pm

Written
by 
Darius
Shahtahmasebi

(ANTIMEDIA Op-ed) — Though some have
been 
warning about
the catastrophic potential for a third global conflict for years, it
wasn’t until
 recently that
these warnings became
 more
mainstream
.
The calamitous nature of the violence in Syria — which has one
nuclear power defending a government that has been the target of a
regime change operation led by the world’s superpower —
combined with 2017’s threats of 
“fire
and fury”
 against
another state intently pursuing a nuclear weapons supply of its own,
has pushed the
 issue
of a third world war
 directly
into the
 public
discourse
.

While
certain hotspots throughout the Middle East, Asia, and Eastern Europe
(i.e. 
Ukraine)
have seen some notable escalations in the last few years, a direct
conflict between Russia and the United States is still yet to emerge.
That’s because the idea of a third world war in today’s world is
completely insane. If the two countries that currently possess the
world’s greatest supplies of nuclear weapons go to war, 
there
may not be a world left
 for
the victors to inhabit after the war is done, thereby making it an
unthinkable proposal.

Then
again, the U.S. did just recently bomb a 
significant
number
 of
Russian-linked forces in Syria, reportedly killing scores of them.
The targets of these air strikes were also 
predominantly
Iranian-backed militias
 (just
in case there weren’t enough state actors already involved in this
ongoing conflict).

Speaking
of Iran, Donald Trump recently fired Rex Tillerson as secretary of
state and immediately appointed CIA director Mike Pompeo to replace
him. Pompeo is a
 notable
anti-Iran hawk
 who
will almost certainly go further than Tillerson was
 ever
prepared
 to
go with regard to the Iranian nuclear accord, a deal Pompeo believes
is “disastrous.”

There
are also reports now emerging that Donald Trump is 
planning to
oust his national security advisor, General H.R. McMaster. McMaster
originally replaced anti-Iran war hawk
 Michael
Flynn
,
but apparently, McMaster’s
 non-stop
allegations
 against
Iran were
 not
enough to please Trump
.
McMaster was not on board with Trump’s attempt to completely derail
the Iranian nuclear deal.

One
should bear in mind that when Donald Trump made the decision to
strike the Syrian government in April of last year in what amounted
to one of the year’s most important and over-publicized
geopolitical events, it was
 McMaster who
drew up the strike plan options and presented them to Trump to choose
from. If this is a man not hawkish enough for Trump’s
administration, his looming removal from the administration is a
worrying sign of what’s to come.

Donald
Trump’s
 Nuclear
Posture Review
 entails
that, as Katrina vanden Heuvel
 noted in
an article published in the 
Washington
Post
:

The
United States 
reserves the right to unleash
nuclear weapons first in ‘extreme circumstances’ to defend the
‘vital interests’ not only of the United States but also of its
‘allies and partners’ — a total of some 30 countries.
 ‘Extreme
circumstances,’ the review states explicitly, include 
significant
non-nuclear attacks,’ including conventional attacks on ‘allied
or partner civilian population or infrastructure.’ 
The
United States also 
maintains a ‘portion of
its nuclear forces’ on daily alert, with the option of launching
those forces ‘promptly.’ 
[emphasis
added]

Considering
that a former analyst for the Council on Foreign Relations, Micah
Zenko, just
 warned that
Pentagon officials are actively searching for a “big war” against
Russia and China, the trajectory we are currently on starts to make a
lot more sense.

In
other parts of the world, we are witnessing a new era of hostilities
towards Russia. The debacle taking place in the U.K. right now, which
has seen allegations of a Russian chemical attack on British soil,
has prompted the U.K., U.S., France, and Germany to
 band
together
 and
condemn Russia for something that hasn’t even been conclusively
investigated yet.

After
years of constantly being painted as the enemy, Russia
just
 declared via
Twitter that a “Cold War II” has begun, and who can blame them?

A
third world war might sound crazy, but it is only crazy if we fail to
understand the desperation that continues to plague the men in suits
who pull the strings guiding American foreign policy. Consider that
the Syrian government, with Russian and Iranian backing, has
managed
 to
stabilize significant parts of the country
 despite
all odds so that refugees can return home safely. It should be clear
that the best way to solve the Syrian crisis is to discontinue
America’s regime change policy in Syria and allow the people of
Syria to normalize their own lives without Washington’s
interference. Yet, after seven years of brutal violence, the U.S.
still refuses to admit defeat in Syria. If anything, the U.S. has now
officially set its sights
 on
directly combatting Iranian influence
 in
the country, raising the potential for significant escalations.

Maybe,
just maybe, the U.S. is that desperate. Apparently, the U.S. has to
remain in Syria out of necessity. It cannot afford to sit on the
sidelines as Russia re-emerges as the major power broker in the
region, eating up all the major contracts
 coming
out of Syria
 (together
with Iran) as it looks to poach American allies left, right, and
center.

Additionally,
Russia recently warned the U.S. that it will not tolerate
Washington’s aggressive attacks on the Syrian government and 
will
respond with strikes of their own
 should
the U.S. military threaten Russian personnel. One should expect that
eventually, there will be a point where Russia will no longer 
allow
these attacks to go unanswered
.

As
America’s power and influence wane, the time will come for both
Russia and China to make their mark on the global stage. Just on a
side note, it should come as no surprise that Trump’s nominated
ambassador to Australia, Adm. Harry Harris, is a known anti-China war
hawk who recently
 warned
Congress to prepare for a war with China
.

Why
should we need to prepare for a war with China? Who talks and thinks
like that? A nation on a slow and inevitable decline that cannot
refuse to admit defeat in almost any battle theater since World War
II, that’s who.

Realistically,
nobody wants a third world war, but as the U.S. increasingly
thrashes to maintain its control of the global financial markets, its
network of over 1,000 bases worldwide, and its status as the world’s
global policemen, a third world war may be Washington’s only hope
at staying afloat as the world’s top power.

Read
more by 
Darius
Shahtahmasebi
:

Op-ed
Creative
Commons
 / Anti-Media / Report
a typo

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

* Australië, Nieuw-Zeeland, de Filipijnen, Thailand en Zuid-Korea zijn zogenaamde MNNA’s (van: ‘Major non-NATO Ally). Deze landen werken op militair gebied nauw samen met de VS (en gegarandeerd met andere NAVO lidstaten), ook wat betreft bewapening en training. (zie wat dat betreft ook de bemoeienis van de VS met de strijd tegen IS op de Filipijnen en de militaire oefeningen met Zuid-Korea langs de grens en de territoriale wateren van Noord-Korea). Voorts heeft de VS militaire bases in die landen, samen met die in westerse landen, kan je spreken van een omsingeling van Rusland en China met militaire bases van de VS……

Zie ook: ‘John Bolton, nationaal veiligheidsadviseur, alsof de duivel zelf is benoemd……..

        en: ‘NEOCONS ARE BACK WITH A BIG WAR BUDGET AND BIG WAR PLANS‘ (een column van Ron Paul, overgenomen van Stan van Houcke)

        en: ‘Noord-Korea en de VS: de planning van de VS om Rusland en China aan te vallen met kernraketten……..

        en: ‘John Bolton, nationaal veiligheidsadviseur, alsof de duivel zelf is benoemd……..

        en: ‘VS nu definitief op oorlogspad tegen China…..

Op 27 maart 2017 kop verbeterd, daar ik dom genoeg Wereld Oorlog had neergeschreven.

VS: oud-geheime dienst medewerkers en inlichtingen veteranen waarschuwen Trump en de wereld voor een oorlog met Iran……..

Oud-geheime
dienst medewerkers en inlichtingen veteranen hebben een memorandum
voor president beest Trump geschreven, met de waarschuwing geen
oorlog met Iran te beginnen, dit daar ze de tekenen daartoe
zien…… Zoals ze ook president George W Bush (nog zo’n gevaarlijke
malloot, dat geldt overigens ook voor Obama de gespletene)
waarschuwden geen oorlog te beginnen met Irak in de 6 weken voordat
de VS illegaal, een op leugens gebaseerde oorlog begon tegen dat
land…….

We
weten wat van de illegale oorlog tegen Irak heeft gebracht: meer dan 1,5
miljoen vermoorde Irakezen en een land dat in chaos is gedompeld en
in puin ligt (reken maar niet, met IS in het defensief, dat de
ellende voor de bevolking daar voorbij is…..)

Een
en ander is ook ingegeven door het bezoek dat de Israëlische Palestijnenslachter Netanyahu volgende week
aan de VS zal brengen, deze psychopathische moordenaar ‘is gewond
geraakt’ door met bewijs onderbouwde zware beschuldigingen van corruptie……* En als bij
gewonde roofdieren moet je dan extra oppassen, immers een oorlog met
Iran zou Netanyahu nu wel uitermate goed uitkomen…….

Uiteraard zal de VS komen met een zogenaamd bewijs waarop het ‘niet anders kan’ dan Iran aanvallen, ofwel een ‘false flag’ operatie, zoals de VS die door haar bloedige geschiedenis heen heeft gebruikt voor het uitoefenen van ongebreidelde agressie, of beter gezegd: grootschalige terreur………..

Lees het volgende uitstekende memorandum en oordeel zelf:

Intelligence
Veterans Warn of Growing Risk for War With Iran Based on False
Pretexts

February
26, 2018 at 9:05 am

Written
by 
Anti-Media
News Desk

(CN— As
President Donald Trump prepares to host Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu next week, a group of U.S. intelligence
veterans offers corrections to a number of false accusations
that have been leveled against Iran.

MEMORANDUM
FOR:
 
The President

FROM: 
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT:  War
With Iran

INTRODUCTION

In
our 
December
21st Memorandum to you
,
we cautioned that the claim that Iran is currently the world’s top
sponsor of terrorism is unsupported by hard evidence. Meanwhile,
other false accusations against Iran have intensified. Thus, we feel
obliged to alert you to the virtually inevitable consequences of war
with Iran, just as we warned President George W. Bush six weeks
before the U.S. attack on Iraq 15 years ago.

In our
first Memorandum in this genre
 we
told then-President Bush that we saw “no compelling reason” to
attack Iraq, and warned “the unintended consequences are likely to
be catastrophic.” The consequences will be far worse, should
the U.S. become drawn into war with Iran. We fear that you are
not getting the straight story on this from your intelligence and
national security officials.

After
choosing “War With Iran” for the subject-line of this Memo, we
were reminded that we had used it before, namely, for 
a
Memorandum to President Obama on August 3, 2010
 in
similar circumstances. You may wish to ask your staff to give you
that one to read and ponder. It included a startling quote from
then-Chairman of President Bush Jr.’s Intelligence Advisory Board
(and former national security adviser to Bush Sr.) Gen. Brent
Scowcroft, who told the 
Financial
Times
 on
October 14, 2004 that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had George
W. Bush “mesmerized;” that “Sharon just has him wrapped around
his little finger.”  We wanted to remind you of that history,
as you prepare to host Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu next
week.

*  
*   *

Rhetoric
vs. Reality

We
believe that the recent reporting regarding possible conflict with
nuclear-armed North Korea has somewhat obscured consideration of the
significantly higher probability that Israel or even Saudi Arabia
will take steps that will lead to a war with Iran that will
inevitably draw the United States in. Israel is particularly inclined
to move aggressively, with potentially serious consequences for the
U.S., in the wake of the recent incident involving an alleged Iranian
drone and the shooting down of an Israeli aircraft.

There
is also considerable anti-Iran rhetoric in U.S. media, which might
well facilitate a transition from a cold war-type situation to a hot
war involving U.S. forces. We have for some time been observing with
some concern the growing hostility towards Iran coming out of
Washington and from the governments of Israel and Saudi Arabia.
National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster is warning that the “time
to act is now” to thwart Iran’s aggressive regional ambitions
while U.S. United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley sees a “wake-up”
call in the recent shooting incident involving Syria and Israel.
Particular concern has been expressed by the White House that Iran is
exploiting Shi’a minorities in neighboring Sunni dominated states
to create unrest and is also expanding its role in neighboring Iraq
and Syria.

While
we share concerns over the Iranian government’s intentions
vis-à-vis its neighbors, we do not believe that the developments in
the region, many of which came about through American missteps, have
a major impact on vital U.S. national interests. Nor is Iran, which
often sees itself as acting defensively against surrounding Sunni
states, anything like an existential threat to the United States that
would mandate the sustained military action that would inevitably
result if Iran is attacked.

Iran’s
alleged desire to stitch together a sphere of influence consisting of
an arc of allied nations and proxy forces running from its western
borders to the Mediterranean Sea has been frequently cited as
justification for a more assertive policy against Tehran, but we
believe this concern to be greatly exaggerated. Iran, with a
population of more than 80 million, is, to be sure, a major regional
power but militarily, economically and politically it is highly
vulnerable.

Limited
Military Capability

Tehran’s
Revolutionary Guard is well armed and trained, but much of its “boots
on the ground” army consists of militiamen of variable quality. Its
Air Force is a “shadow” of what existed under the Shah and
is significantly outgunned by its rivals in the Persian Gulf, not to
mention Israel. Its navy is only “green water” capable in that it
consists largely of smaller vessels responsible for coastal defense
supplemented by the swarming of Revolutionary Guard small speedboats.

When
Napoleon had conquered much of continental Europe and was
contemplating invading Britain it was widely believed that England
was helpless before him. British Admiral Earl St Vincent was
unperturbed: “I do not say the French can’t come, I only say they
can’t come by sea.” We likewise believe that Iran’s apparent
threat is in reality decisively limited by its inability to project
power across the water or through the air against neighboring states
that have marked superiority in both respects.

The
concern over a possibly developing “Shi’ite land bridge,” also
referred to as an “arc” or “crescent,” is likewise
overstated. It ignores the reality that Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon all
have strong national identities and religiously mixed populations.
They are influenced — some of them strongly — by Iran but they
are not puppet states. And there is also an ethnic division that the
neighboring states’ populations are very conscious of– they are
Arabs and Iran is Persian, which is also true of the Shi’a
populations in Saudi Arabia and the Emirates.

Majority
Shi’a Iraq, for example, is now very friendly to Iran but it has to
deal with considerable Kurdish and Sunni minorities in its governance
and in the direction of its foreign policy. It will not do Iran’s
bidding on a number of key issues, including Baghdad’s relationship
with Washington, and would be unwilling to become a proxy in Tehran’s
conflicts with Israel and Saudi Arabia. Iraqi Vice President Osama
al-Nujaifi, the highest-ranking Sunni in the Prime Minister Haider
al-Abadi government, has, for example, recently called for the
demobilization of the Shi’ite Popular Mobilization Forces or
militias that have been fighting ISIS because they “have their own
political aspirations, their own [political] agendas. … They are
very dangerous to the future of Iraq.”

Nuclear
Weapons Thwarted

A
major concern that has undergirded much of the perception of an
Iranian threat is the possibility that Tehran will develop a nuclear
weapon somewhere down the road. We believe that the current Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action, even if imperfect, provides the best
response to that Iranian proliferation problem. The U.N. inspections
regime is strict and, if the agreement stands, there is every reason
to believe that Iran will be unable to take the necessary precursor
steps leading to a nuclear weapons program. Iran will be further
limited in its options after the agreement expires in nine years.
Experts believe that, at that point, Iran its not likely to choose to
accumulate the necessary highly enriched uranium stocks to proceed.

The
recent incident involving the shoot-down of a drone alleged to be
Iranian, followed by the downing of an Israeli fighter by a Syrian
air defense missile, resulted in a sharp response from Tel Aviv,
though reportedly mitigated by a warning from Russian President
Vladimir Putin that anything more provocative might inadvertently
involve Russia in the conflict. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu is said to have moderated his response but his government
is clearly contemplating a more robust intervention to counter what
he describes as a developing Iranian presence in Syria.

In
addition, Netanyahu may be indicted on corruption charges, and it is
conceivable that he might welcome a “small war” to deflect
attention from mounting political problems at home.

Getting
Snookered Into War

We
believe that the mounting Iran hysteria evident in the U.S. media and
reflected in Beltway groupthink has largely been generated by Saudi
Arabia and Israel, who nurture their own aspirations for regional
political and military supremacy. There are no actual American vital
interests at stake and it is past time to pause and take a step
backwards to consider what those interests actually are in a region
that has seen nothing but disaster since 2003. Countering an assumed
Iranian threat that is minimal and triggering a war would be
catastrophic and would exacerbate instability, likely leading to a
breakdown in the current political alignment of the entire Middle
East. It would be costly for the United States.

Iran
is not militarily formidable, but its ability to fight on the
defensive against U.S. naval and air forces is considerable and can
cause high casualties. There appears to be a perception in the
Defense

Department
that Iran could be defeated in a matter of days, but we would warn
that such predictions tend to be based on overly optimistic
projections, witness the outcomes in Afghanistan and Iraq. In
addition, Tehran would be able again to unleash terrorist resources
throughout the region, endangering U.S. military and diplomats based
there as well as American travelers and businesses. The terrorist
threat might easily extend beyond the Middle East into Europe and
also the United States, while the dollar costs of a major new
conflict and its aftermath could break the bank, literally.

Another
major consideration before ratcheting up hostilities should be that a
war with Iran might not be containable. As the warning from President
Vladimir Putin to Netanyahu made clear, other major powers have
interests in what goes on in the Persian Gulf, and there is a real
danger that a regional war could have global consequences.

In
sum, we see a growing risk that the U.S. will become drawn into
hostilities on pretexts fabricated by Israel and Saudi Arabia for
their actual common objective (“regime change” in Iran). A
confluence of factors and misconceptions about what is at stake and
how such a conflict is likely to develop, coming from both inside and
outside the Administration have, unfortunately, made such an outcome
increasingly likely.

We
have seen this picture before, just 15 years ago in Iraq, which
should serve as a warning. The prevailing perception of threat
that the Mullahs of Iran allegedly pose directly against the security
of the U.S. is largely contrived. Even if all the allegations were
true, they would not justify an Iraq-style “preventive war”
violating national as well as international law. An ill-considered
U.S. intervention in Iran is surely not worth the horrific
humanitarian, military, economic, and political cost to be paid if
Washington allows itself to become part of an armed attack.

FOR
THE STEERING GROUP, VETERAN INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS FOR SANITY

William
Binney, former NSA Technical Director for World Geopolitical &
Military Analysis; Co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence
Automation Research Center (ret.)

Kathleen
Christison, CIA, Senior Analyst on Middle East (ret.)

Graham
E. Fuller, Vice-Chair, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Philip
Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)

Matthew
Hoh, former Capt., USMC Iraq; Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan
(associate VIPS)

Larry
C. Johnson, former CIA and State Department Counter Terrorism officer

Michael
S. Kearns, Captain, USAF; ex-Master SERE Instructor for Strategic
Reconnaissance Operations (NSA/DIA) and Special Mission Units (JSOC)
(ret.)

John
Brady Kiesling, Foreign Service Officer; resigned Feb. 27, 2003 as
Political Counselor, U.S. Embassy, Athens, in protest against the
U.S. attack on Iraq (ret.)

John
Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former senior
investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Edward
Loomis, Jr., former NSA Technical Director for the Office of Signals
Processing (ret.)

David
MacMichael, National Intelligence Council, National Intelligence
Estimates Officer (ret.)

Ray
McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA
analyst; CIA Presidential briefer (ret.)

Elizabeth
Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Near East (ret.)

Todd
E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (ret.)

Coleen
Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal
Counsel (ret.)

Greg
Thielmann, former Director of the Strategic, Proliferation, and
Military Affairs Office, State

Department
Bureau of Intelligence & Research (INR), and former senior
staffer on Senate Intelligence Committee (ret.)

Kirk
Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA
ret.)

Lawrence
Wilkerson, Colonel (USA, ret.), former Chief of Staff for Secretary
of State; Distinguished Visiting Professor, College of William and
Mary (associate VIPS)

Sarah
G. Wilton, CDR, USNR, (ret.); Defense Intelligence Agency (ret.)

Robert
Wing, former Foreign Service Officer (associate VIPS)

Ann
Wright, Colonel, US Army (ret.); also Foreign Service Officer who,
like Political Counselor John Brady Kiesling, resigned in opposition
to the war on Iraq

Republished
with permission / 
Consortium
News
 / Report
a typo

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

* En misdadiger Netanyahu wordt nog serieus genomen ook door de reguliere westerse journalistiek en het grootste deel van de westerse politici…..

Zie ook: ‘Oost-Ghouta >> ‘gematigde rebellen’ schieten op vluchtende burgers, aldus VN……. Aandacht in Nederlandse media nul komma nada….‘ (waar me het nog meeviel dat deze media niet hebben gemeld dat Syrische troepen op de vluchtelingen schoten, zoals in Oost-Aleppo gebeurde, waarover je rustig kan zeggen dat dit een false flag operatie was)

       en: ‘VS agressie in Syrië voorzien van een vooropgezet plan…….

       en: ‘Oost-Ghouta: MSM leugens ofwel het zoveelste geval van ‘fake news’ lekt weg uit uit de massamedia

       en: ‘VS bezig met voorbereiding van een ‘door Syrië’ gepleegde gifgasaanval, ofwel de volgende VS false flag operatie

Washington uit op oorlog met Iran……

De
Trump administratie wil hoe dan ook de ‘Iran nuclear deal’ de nek
omdraaien en eist van de andere deelnemers, vooral die in de EU
dezelfde houding, zonder dat deze administratie daar over wil
discussiëren……….

De
VS wil ‘opnieuw onderhandelen’ over deze overeenkomst met Iran, met
daarin bepalingen waarvan men weet dat Iran hier niet mee akkoord kan
en zal gaan…….

‘Uiteraard’
komt de Trump administratie met het versleten cliché over de Iraanse ongebreidelde agressie….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Een gevalletje de
pot verwijt een piepklein keteltje dat het zwart ziet, waarbij
opgemerkt moet worden dat de VS kleurenblind is (behalve als het om
de repressie tegen de gekleurde bevolking in de VS gaat)……..

Als
er een ‘land’ is dat ongebreidelde agressie gebruikt, is het de VS
wel! Alleen deze eeuw al 4 illegale oorlogen en de regie over een
paar (illegale) oorlogen in Afrika……. Dit nog buiten de door
Washington op poten gezette opstanden die tot een coup hebben geleid
en als dit niet lukte alsnog uitmonden in een (illegale) oorlog, zoals in Syrië,
waar de VS al vanaf 2006 bezig was met het opzetten van een opstand
(die tot een coup moest leiden)……

Kortom
de Trump administratie is bezig met de voorbereiding op een oorlog
tegen Iran (waarvoor de nucleaire leugen tegen Iran overigens maar één
van de ‘redenen’ is…..)…. Het is maar zeer de vraag of Rusland
en China zich afzijdig zullen houden, mocht de VS een illegale oorlog
tegen Iran beginnen….. Als dit niet het geval zal zijn, is een in
volle omvang uitbarsten van WOIII bijzonder dichtbij……

Hoe
is het mogelijk dat men in het westen in de 60er, 70er en 80er jaren
massaal in opstand kwam tegen de terreur van de VS, waar ook toen een
nucleaire oorlog meermaals in de lucht hing, waar men nu doodstil is en de
VS haar gang laat gaan…??? Terwijl het gevaar op een nucleaire
oorlog nu veel groter is dan destijds, immers de VS (en
Groot-Brittannië) spreken nu openlijk over het inzetten van nucleaire
wapens bij een militair conflict, sterker nog: de Trump administratie
dreigt zelfs met nucleaire vergelding als ‘een land’ (Rusland, China
en Noord-Korea) mocht beslissen een ‘cyberaanval’ te beginnen tegen
de VS……. ‘Cyberaanvallen’ zoals de zogenaamde manipulatie van de
VS presidentsverkiezingen, waarvoor tot op heden geen enkel steekhoudend
bewijs is geleverd, maar waar wel een enorm aantal bewijzen liggen voor dit soort van handelingen door de VS zelf in andere landen!!

Washington
Delivers New Ultimatum On Iran

By
Bill Van Auken

February
21, 2018 “Information
Clearing House
” – The US State Department has
issued a fresh ultimatum on the Iran nuclear deal to Washington’s
ostensible major allies in Europe, demanding that Germany, Britain
and France commit themselves to altering the agreement along the
lines demanded by President Donald Trump or face its unilateral
abrogation by the US.


A
secret State Department cable obtained by Reuters presents what are
essentially the same demands made by Trump last January. At that
time, he announced that he was prepared to relaunch all-out US
economic warfare against Iran unless the European powers joined
Washington in imposing a rewritten nuclear accord on Tehran,
including provisions that the Iranian government cannot and will not
accept.


The
occasion for Trump’s threat was his reluctant announcement on
January 12 that he had decided to waive the reimposition of US
sanctions that were lifted as part of the nuclear agreement, formally
known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). He vowed
that this would be the last time he issued such a waiver, unless his
conditions were met. The next deadline for waiving the sanctions is
May 12.


The
message from the State Department to the European powers asks for
their “commitment that we should work together to seek a
supplemental or follow-on agreement that addresses Iran’s
development or testing long-range missiles, ensures strong IAEA
inspections, and fixes the flaws of the ‘sunset clause.’”


Washington
has demanded that Iran grant International Atomic Energy Agency
inspectors immediate and unlimited access to any site in the country,
including military bases; the elimination of “sunset clauses” in
the JCPOA, making time-limited restrictions on aspects of Iran’s
civil nuclear program permanent; and drastically limiting, if not
outlawing, Iran’s ballistic missile program.


While
presented by Reuters and other media as a softening of the position
outlined by Trump in January, the cable makes it clear that the US is
continuing to present its nominal allies in Europe with an ultimatum.



In
the absence of a clear commitment from your side to address these
issues, the United States will not again waive sanctions in order to
stay in the Iran nuclear deal. If at any time the President judges
that such commitment is not within reach, the President indicated he
would end US participation in the deal.”


The
cable’s “talking points” for US diplomats to advance
Washington’s agenda in Europe stress “the Trump administration’s
strategy to counter the Iranian regime’s reckless aggression,”
which “addresses the full range of Iranian threats, of which Iran’s
nuclear program is only one element.”


The
clear implication is that Washington is embarked on a trajectory of
war with Iran, either with or without the collaboration of its NATO
allies in Berlin, London and Paris. Should they join with the US in
ripping up the nuclear accord, it will set them on a collision course
not only with Iran, but also with Russia and China, the two other
signatories to the JCPOA.


The
US has spelled out its own intentions in the Trump administration’s
recent National Security Strategy, lumping Iran together with North
Korea under the category of “rogue states” that represent a
threat to US “national interests” and are to be confronted and
defeated.


None
of the European powers responded directly to the US cable, which the
State Department itself refused to discuss. Asked about the US
demands in an online media briefing, the French Foreign Ministry
declared: “The French position on the Iran nuclear deal is known.
As the President of the Republic [Emmanuel Macron] has said, we
reaffirm our full attachment to the global action plan and its strict
implementation.” It added that Paris would “continue to talk
about the Iran nuclear program with our European and American
partners.”


The
European powers are pursuing their own imperialist interests in the
Middle East and are increasingly at odds with US interests and
strategies. The lifting of sanctions against Iran was greeted by
European corporations as an opportunity to generate a fresh stream of
profits through billions of dollars in new investments and trade
deals. Many of these plans remain unfulfilled because of concerns
that the US will target companies with unilateral sanctions, and that
their investments could go up in smoke in the event of a new and
catastrophic US war in the Middle East.


While
hostile to Iran’s growing influence in the region, the European
powers are increasingly alarmed at the prospect that Washington’s
strategy of forging a regional anti-Iranian alliance with Israel and
Saudi Arabia, together with the other Sunni Gulf oil sheikdoms, will
produce a military confrontation that could cut off oil supplies upon
which Europe depends and unleash a political and refugee crisis that
will spill onto the continent.


Washington
has issued its latest ultimatum in the midst of an explosive
escalation of regional tensions, driven in the main by US and Israeli
aggression. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spelled out Tel
Aviv’s aggressive stance against Iran in a bellicose speech to the
Munich Security Conference on Sunday. Holding up what he claimed was
a piece of an Iranian drone shot down over Israeli-occupied Syrian
territory in the Golan Heights, he denounced Iran as “the greatest
threat to the world,” equating it with Nazi Germany.



We
will act without hesitation to defend ourselves, and we will act if
necessary not just against Iran’s proxies that are attacking us,
but against Iran itself,” said Netanyahu, in a clear threat to
attack Iran, an action that his government would undertake only with
US backing.

Israel
responded to the alleged overflight of the drone, which Tehran
insists was launched by independent Syrian militia elements in Syria,
by targeting Iranian personnel in Syria with air strikes. Syrian air
defense units succeeded in shooting down an Israeli F-16 fighter jet,
the first such loss for the Israeli Air Force since the early 1980s.

Speaking
in response to Netanyahu at the Munich conference, Mohammad Javad
Zarif, the Iranian foreign minister, attributed the frenzied tone of
Netanyahu’s speech to the downing of the warplane. “The so-called
invincibility of [Israel] has crumbled,” he said.

The
US military and intelligence apparatus and its loyal stenographers in
the US corporate media are churning out continuous war propaganda
against Iran.

Speaking
at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, US national security
advisor Gen. H.R. McMaster declared it was necessary to “act
against Iran,” which he accused of arming a “network of proxies”
that is “becoming more and more capable as Iran seeds more and
more…destructive weapons into these networks.”


The New
York Times
 published
a lengthy piece Monday based on interviews with Israeli military
officers and government officials along with representatives of US,
Israeli and Saudi-funded think tanks alleging that Iran is “creating
an infrastructure [in Syria] to threaten Israel.” Needless to say,
the article made no mention of Israel’s own funding and aid for
Sunni Islamist militias attacking the Syrian government of President
Bashar al-Assad.


The
same issue of the 
Times carried
an opinion piece by US ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley
claiming, falsely, that a report issued by the United Nations proved
that Iran has shipped missiles to the Houthi rebels in Yemen to fire
at Saudi Arabia. The actual report found that “remnants” of the
missiles were of Iranian origin, while providing no evidence as to
how they got there.

Haley
insists that the world must “act before a missile hits a school or
a hospital and leads to a dangerous military escalation that provokes
a Saudi military response.”

The
column echoes the “big lie” methods pioneered by Nazi Minister of
Propaganda Joseph Goebbels. 


That Saudi Arabia has been bombing Yemeni
schools, hospitals, neighborhoods and infrastructure for nearly three
years, killing some 13,000 Yemeni civilians and plunging the
country’s population into the worst humanitarian crisis on the
planet, goes unmentioned.


Haley
is also silent on the fact that the US has provided the vast majority
of the bombs and missiles dropped on the Yemeni people, while
mounting logistical and refueling operations that make the mass
slaughter possible.

This
article was originally published by “
WSWS

Copyright
© 1998-2018 World Socialist Web Site

Zie
ook: ‘The Coming Wars to End AllWars‘ 
geschreven door Edward Curtin:

The
Trump and Netanyahu governments have a problem: How to start a
greatly expanded Middle-Eastern war without having a justifiable
reason for one. 

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

PS: ben het niet eens met Auken wat betreft de opstelling van de EU, als zou de EU haar eigen imperialistische belangen najagen in het Midden-Oosten, waar hij de ‘Iran deal’ als voorbeeld noemt. Uiteraard blijven de andere partijen die voor deze deal tekenden, geloven in deze deal, dit daar de Trump administratie (zoals gewoonlijk) met een hele bak leugens komt om deze deal de nek om te draaien….. Wat dit met imperialisme te maken heeft zie ik niet. Verder lopen de meeste EU landen blindelings aan achter de grootste terreurentiteit op aarde: de VS………..

Zie ook: ‘Rex Tillerson (VS BuZA) geeft toe dat de VS een staatsgreep wil uitvoeren in Iran…….. Het is nog ‘iets te rustig’ in dat gebied……..

       en: ‘Lt. General McInerney says Obama helped build ISIS with Weapons from Benghazi

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

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

       en: ‘Protesten Iran opgezet door de VS en Israël

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

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

       en: ‘Het verborgen motief achter de Israëlische agressie tegen Iran en Syrië

       en: ‘VS bewandelt dezelfde weg richting Iran, als die voor de illegale oorlog tegen Irak in 2003, aldus één van de verantwoordelijken voor die oorlog……..

       en: ‘Netanyahu vergelijkt Iran met nazi-Duitsland en stelt dat Iran een bedreiging is voor de wereldvrede….. ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Oliemaatschappijen weigeren n.a.v. VS sancties de jet van Iraanse minister af te tanken

       en: ‘Israël bezig met voorbereiding op meerdere fronten oorlog…….. (met hulp van de VS

       en: ‘John Bolton heeft beloofd dat Iran voor 2019 onder een ander regime zal leven…….

        en: ‘Saoedi-Arabië dreigt Iran aan te vallen voor vanuit Jemen afgevuurde ‘raketten’ op Saoedische ‘doelen……….’

       en: ‘VS rechter gelast Iran miljarden te betalen aan de families van 911 slachtoffers…..

       en: ‘Iran moet hangen en Iran-deal moet van tafel……. Israël speelt wolf in schaapskleren

       en: ‘Iran het volgende slachtoffer van ongebreidelde VS terreur

Syrië: VS en Israëlische agressie dreigt de wereld in een oorlog te storten……

De door de VS geleidde coalitie heeft met haar aanval op strijders voor het legitieme Syrische leger een grens overschreden die het risico op een oorlog tussen de VS en Rusland een heel stuk dichterbij brengt…… Je zal begrijpen dat wanneer dit gebeurd er sprake zal zijn van de Derde Weredloorlog, immers China zal zich zonder meer achter Rusland scharen tegen de ongebreidelde VS agressie (of zeg maar gerust; terreur)….

De VS heeft intussen 2.000 militairen op Syrisch grondgebied en is daarmee illegaal aanwezig in dit land, het lamme excuus voor de hiervoor genoemde aanval dat het hier om zelfverdediging gaat, is zo bezien al helemaal een gotspe!!

Israël heeft intussen laten zien het niet eens te zijn met de huidige status quo en heeft zich nu volledig in de Syrische oorlog gemengd, dit zogenaamd na een aanval met een drone op ‘Israëlisch grondgebied’, een duidelijke false flag operatie met de bedoeling de eigen terreur in Syrië te rechtvaardigen…… Eerdere bombardementen voerde Israël zogenaamd uit, om Iraanse wapentransporten richting Libanon te voorkomen, echter de grootste schade schijnt toch te zijn toegebracht aan het Syrische leger en groepen die samen met dit leger tegen IS hebben gestreden en strijden……..

De corrupte Israëlische premier Netanyahu heeft de afgelopen tijd wekelijks minstens één keer Syrië en Iran gewaarschuwd voor aanvallen van Israël als men niet zou inbinden en bijvoorbeeld zou proberen gebieden aan de Golanhoogten te heroveren, hetzelfde gebied dat Israël NB aan de andere kant van de grens illegaal heeft bezet …… Eerder lapte Israël IS strijders op in hetzelfde gebied, zodat ze daarna verder konden vechten tegen het reguliere Syrische leger, ook voerde Israël op verzoek van IS bombardementen uit op stellingen van het Syrische leger……

Nu is nog de vraag hoelang Rusland zal blijven toezien, voordat het Israëlische en/of VS jagers zal aanvallen……..

Lees het volgende uitstekende artikel van Darius Shahtahmasebi, zoals weergegeven op Anti-Media:

The
World Is on the Brink of War Once Again as All Hell Breaks Loose in
Syria

February
8, 2018 at 11:53 am

Written
by 
Darius
Shahtahmasebi

(ANTIMEDIA)  The
U.S.-led coalition conducted air and artillery strikes against
pro-regime forces in Syria on Wednesday, killing over 100
pro-government fighters, 
CNN reports.

According
to the coalition’s statement, the strikes were carried out after
forces allied with the Syrian government “
initiated
an unprovoked attack

against
what 
CNN termed a
well-established Syrian Democratic Forces headquarters where
coalition advisers were working with US-backed Syrian fighters.”

CNN dubbed
the U.S.-led strike “defensive” even though U.S. forces have no
legal authority to be in Syria in the first place, something the 
New
York Times
 was
forced to admit
 a
few weeks ago. According to official numbers, there are some 2,000
U.S. troops embedded with SDF forces in Syria, and Syria has deemed
these U.S. troops to be an 
invading
force
.
Technically, the act of violating Syria’s sovereignty and killing
over 100 of its troops in a flagrant act of war makes the U.S. the
aggressor — not the defender — in this scenario. (If you are
having trouble understanding this, try reversing the U.S. and Syria
in the scenario and seeing how you would feel if the shoe were on the
other foot).

According to
the 
Marine
Corps Times
,
the coalition service members were acting in an “advise, assist and
accompany capacity” when the attack occurred, eight kilometers east
of the current Euphrates River deconfliction line. However, U.S.
troops in Syria have been doing a lot more than advising and
assisting on the ground.
 According to
Army Sgt. Major. John Wayne Troxell, one particular Marine
battalion “
fired
more rounds in five months in Raqqa, Syria, than any other Marine
artillery battalion, or any Marine or Army battalion, since the
Vietnam war.”

In
five months they fired 35,000 artillery rounds on ISIS targets,
killing ISIS fighters by the dozens,”
 Troxell
told Marine
Corps Times
 in
January.

The Marine
Corps Times
 called it an “explosive revelation” that
shed light on the “immense level of lethal force brought to
Raqqa and northern Syria
,” noting that in comparison, only
34,000 artillery rounds had been fired in the invasion of Iraq.

Moving
back to the matter at hand, 
CNN reported
that the attack on the U.S. base in Syria involved some 500 pro-Assad
forces using artillery, mortar fire, and Russian-made tanks.
According to the military official 
CNN quoted,
no U.S. or SDF forces were killed in the attack, but the coalition
still saw it fit to retaliate by killing at least 100 Syrian
government forces. It is indisputably and particularly hypocritical
that there is no international outrage over this act of aggression
when one compares the 
media
hysteria
 over
a country like North Korea, which is currently bombing no one.

The
official also stated that the coalition suspected the pro-government
forces attacked because they have their sights set on seizing the
lucrative oil fields in the area, which the SDF had previously taken
after ISIS’ control over the area collapsed.

Despite
the fact that this territory belongs to Syria, the U.S. is providing
air cover for the SDF to take hold of this oil-rich region. The SDF
doesn’t have an air force of its own, but if it can 
start
generating substantial revenue
 from
these oil fields, then it may be able to start buying more and more
military equipment from the U.S.

The
other option, of course, is that the U.S. can provide air cover for
the SDF in the region indefinitely, something that could pose a
problem in the distant future if the U.S. military presence has no
determined end in sight. As it stands, the U.S. is proposing it stay
in Syria until a political resolution sees the 
Assad
government unseated
.

The
official also explained that Russia had been informed of the presence
of pro-regime forces in the area before the attack and that Russia
assured the coalition they would not engage with coalition forces.
Russia 
responded
to the attack
 almost
immediately, condemning the U.S. military presence in Syria as
“illegal” and accusing the U.S. of trying to steal Syrian oil.

The
recent incident once again shows that the United States’ illegal
military presence in Syria is actually aimed at taking control of the
country’s economic assets and not at fighting against the ISIS
international terror group,”
 the
Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement, as quoted by
the Washington
Post (WaPo)
It
should also be noted that these incidents of aggression do nothing to
aid 
Russia’s
current and ongoing attempt
 to
establish a peace process of its own.

At
around the same time, Turkish media
 reported that
Turkey’s Prime Minister and its Foreign Minister had been in
contact with both Iran and Russia. This is remarkable because these
communications have preceded a scheduled visit to Turkey this weekend
by U.S. national security advisor H.R. McMaster. Iran and Russia were
also reportedly in contact with each other at around the same time,
as well. Could it be that this 
triangle
of emerging power brokers
 in
Syria deciding the fate of Syria without the involvement of the U.S.
has prompted the American military to take drastic measures to
disrupt this developing alliance? Even with opposing aims in Syria —
and even with 
Turkey’s
recent invasion of Syrian territory
 —
Iran, Turkey, and Russia have all managed to find some common ground
without resorting to a confrontation with one another.

Accusing
the U.S. of “mission-creep,” former U.S. ambassador to Syria
Robert Ford 
said “[t]he
Americans have managed through their diplomatic strategy to isolate
themselves to the point where Turkey, Iran and Syria all agree that
what the U.S. is doing in Syria is bad.”

Further,
before the American-led air attack took place, Russia accused the
U.S. of
 attempting
to partition Syria
,
an accusation that appears to be grounded in reality. 
CNN has
acknowledged that the U.S. did not strike pro-regime forces that
crossed back to their assigned territory of the Euphrates River even
though all of the territory technically belongs to the government
under international law. In other words, the U.S. is happy to leave
Syrian troops to their own devices provided they stay within the
areas the U.S. has assigned to them. How else could this be
described, if not a partition?

Further,
according to the International Crisis Group (ICG), an international
NGO whose mission is to prevent and resolve deadly conflict, 
Iran
and Israel are only one “miscalculation”
 away
from war as both sides have been seen to escalate their military
interventions in Syria. The ICG identified Russia as the only real
mediator between the two countries and urged Russia to play a more
active role in averting a potential escalation.

Further,
also on Wednesday, the 
BBC reported that
Israeli warplanes had attacked a military complex in Damascus. A
Syrian military statement reportedly said its air defense systems had
blocked most of the missiles, but it is not clear if there were any
significant casualties. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu also reportedly 
visited the
disputed Golan Heights territory at the same time, warning his
enemies not to test Israel’s resolve. This was a clear reference to
Iran and Hezbollah, which is prominent in both Lebanon and Syria.


In
what can be described as an amazing coincidence, these air attacks by
both Israel and the U.S. have 
taken
place off the back of a joint military exercise
 between
the United States and Israel, which simulated a joint U.S.-Israeli
response to a rocket attack by Hezbollah.


Were
these recent attacks by Israel and the U.S. a one-time incident in
response to the threats allegedly posed by pro-Assad forces,
including Hezbollah? Or are both these countries building up to
something more confrontational?

All
things considered, it seems likely we will find out where this
conflict is headed in the not too distant future, especially given
the potential for one miscalculated move to lead to something
extremely volatile. As it stands, it should be noted that in the
meantime, it is not Syria that is attacking any other state or
launching a war against any other country.

With
the assistance of the media, the U.S. and Israel continue to bomb
Syrian territory in direct contravention of international law, now
killing and wounding significant numbers of the Syrian government’s
armed forces without any significant journalistic or international
opposition.

One
can only hope that someone heeds the advice of the ICG and attempts
to de-escalate this conflict before it transforms itself into a
regional powder keg involving at least three or more 
nuclear
powers
.

Creative
Commons
 / Anti-Media / Report
a typo


Zie ook: ‘VS coalitie valt Syrische troepen aan……… Ofwel de strijd van de VS tegen IS, is in feite een strijd tegen de democratisch gekozen regering Assad……..


        en: VS bewandelt dezelfde weg richting Iran, als die voor de illegale oorlog tegen Irak in 2003, aldus één van de verantwoordelijken voor die oorlog……..‘  


        en: ‘Rusland heeft geen aanval uitgevoerd op VS troepen in Syrië…..

        en: ‘Syrië: nieuwe gifgasaanval als ‘false flag’ operatie tegen Syrisch bewind in voorbereiding……..

        en: ‘Hondsdolle VS valt Russische tank aan in poging de Russen te provoceren……

        en: ‘VS geeft toe dat er geen bewijs is voor het gebruik van gifgas ‘door Assad’, ofwel: alweer ‘fake news’ van de massamedia doorgeprikt!

McMaster: Rusland manipuleert de Mexicaanse verkiezingen…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Nadat
CIA directeur Mike Pompeo eerder al beweerde dat de Russen de VS congresverkiezingen van 2018 hebben gemanipuleerd (jazeker, die
moeten nog plaatsvinden!! ha! ha!), kwam flapdrol McMaster met het
bericht dat Rusland de komende Mexicaanse presidentsverkiezingen manipuleert…… 
Het Witte Huis weigert verder commentaar te leveren op deze grove en smerige beschuldiging……

Je hebt het vast al geraden: er is niet een flinter bewijs
geleverd voor deze stellingen, je roept ‘t gewoon een keer of
honderd, geholpen door de reguliere (massa-) media, gesteund door het grootste
deel van de westerse politici en het gros van de mensen gelooft de leugen…… 

De
Mexicaanse media hebben de regerende PRI partij beschuldigd van het
bezig zijn met het manipuleren van de komende verkiezingen, de
zittende regering heeft zelfs de wetgeving aangepast mocht het
vanwege deze manipulaties tot grote protesten komen na de
verkiezingen….. 
Echter zoals je begrijpt heeft dit niets, maar dan
ook helemaal niets met Rusland te maken……

Moet je nagaan: er zijn bewijzen te over dat de VS verkiezingen elders manipuleert, sterker nog, zelfs democratisch gekozen regeringen laat afzetten door manipulaties van o.a. de CIA…….. (‘democratie brengen’, de code die het leger aan foute oorlogshitsende VS politici gebruikt, als de VS weer een bloedige illegale oorlog begint…)

Lees
het volgende bericht van Jason Ditz, geplaatst op ANTIWAR:

McMaster:
Russia Meddling in Mexico’s Election

White
House Declines to Offer Details on Accusation

Jason
Ditz
Januari 7, 2018 McMaster
MexicoRussia

A
video clip has emerged from a recent talk by National Security
Adviser H.R. McMaster, is which he accused Russia of “a 
sophisticated
effort”
 to
meddle in the upcoming Mexican elections.


Putin en de Mexicaanse president Nieto

McMaster
claimed that the public had seen “initial signs” of such
meddling, but did not elaborate in the talks. The White House has
subsequently refused to comment on the accusation.

Recent
media reports have 
suggested
that the ruling PRI has been setting the stage for a rigged 
election,
with changes to the internal security laws made supposedly to prevent
larger protests in such an eventuality.

The
problem is, such allegations haven’t had even a plausible
connection to Russia, and the US claims seem based on just the
ongoing US supposition that Russia would want to be involved in
anything. In keeping with that, CIA Director Mike
Pompeo 
accused Russia
of interfering in the 2018 US Congressional elections, even though
campaigning hasn’t really even started in that case.

Last
5 posts by Jason Ditz

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

False Flag operaties ofwel terreur, dit is het moedwillig schade toebrengen aan eigen zaken dan wel zaken als het vermoorden van eigen burgers of burgers elders, met de opzet een tegenstander de schuld te geven, worden afgedaan als samenzweringstheorieën of complottheorieën. Echter een groot aantal feiten en bekentenissen bewijzen dat deze terreur wel degelijk bestaat en dat al heel lang………

In feite werd dit al duidelijk uit de Vault 7 en Vault 8 documenten op Wikileaks, waaruit bleek, dat de CIA en NSA over een groot aantal ‘instrumenten’ beschikken, waarmee men via het internet zaken kan manipuleren door te hacken en de schuld daarvoor in de schoenen van een ‘vijandige’ staat kan schuiven. in feite een ‘false flag’ operatie………

VS Generaal H.R. McMaster zei gisteren dat de vijanden van de VS, Rusland en China, plus extreem rechtse en linkse activisten vitriool spuien op het internet om het volk aan het twijfelen te brengen over de maatschappij waarin zij leven…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! E.e.a. werd een uur geleden gemeld op BBC World Service (rond 12.09 u. CET), ook al kan McMaster niet één bewezen feit opnoemen (zoals gewoonlijk in dit soort angst- en haatzaaierij)……. Als er nu één ‘land’ is dat zich wel bewezen met dergelijke zaken bezighoudt, is het de VS zelf wel!!

Van een aantal zaken was ik wel op de hoogte en toch verbaasde mij het enorme aantal ‘false flag operaties’, die niet zelden tot een enorm aantal moorden, nou zeg maar gerust ‘massamoorden’ hebben geleid, neem de aanleiding voor de illegale oorlogen die de VS voerde tegen Noord-Vietnam (plus tegelijkertijd in het geheim tegen andere landen in de regio) en Irak…..

Ook terreuraanslagen in Europa waren niet zelden ‘false flag operaties’, ofwel ‘false flag terreur…’

Overigens niets nieuws onder de zon, er bestaan al meer dan 2.000 jaar van dit soort operaties.

Het volgende artikel vond ik op het blog van Stan van Houcke, het origineel komt van Newsweek (een regulier nieuwsmedium*), van Houcke nam het over van WashingtonsBlog. Lezen mensen en geeft het door, je weet niet wat je leest!! Hiermee maken wat mij betreft de uitdragers van ‘Russische manipulaties’ in de VS presidentsverkiezingen en manipulaties in EU landen, zich voorgoed totaal ongeloofwaardig (al waren deze beweringen al langer bewezen lariekoek).

There
Are Now So Many Admissions by Government Officials of False Flag
Terror that Only the Willfully Ignorant Still Doubt the Reality
of the Concept

← Newsweek: “U.S. Government Planned False Flag Attacks to Start War”

Posted
on
 December
17, 2017
 by WashingtonsBlog

Presidents,
Prime Ministers, Congressmen, Generals, Spooks, Soldiers and Police
ADMIT to False Flag Terror

Scores
of government officials throughout the world have 
admitted (either
orally, in writing, or through photographs or videos) to carrying out
– or seriously proposing – false flag attacks:

  1. Japanese
    troops set off a small explosion on a train track in 1931, and
    falsely blamed it on China in order to justify an invasion of
    Manchuria. This is 
    known
    as
     the
    “Mukden Incident” or the “Manchurian Incident”. The Tokyo
    International Military Tribunal 
    found:
    “Several of the participators in the plan, including Hashimoto [a
    high-ranking Japanese army officer], 
    have
    on various occasions 
    admitted their
    part in the plot and have stated that the object of the ‘Incident’
    was to afford an excuse for the occupation of Manchuria by the
    Kwantung Army ….” And see 
    this,
    this and this.

(2)
A major with the Nazi SS 
admitted at
the Nuremberg trials that – under orders from the chief of the
Gestapo – he and some other Nazi operatives faked several attacks
on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to
justify the invasion of Poland. The staged attacks 
included:

  • The
    German radio station at Gleiwitz [details below]

  • The
    strategic railway at Jabłonków Pass, located on the border between
    Poland and Czechoslovakia

  • The
    German customs station at Hochlinden

  • The
    forest service station in Pitschen

  • The
    communications station at Neubersteich

  • The
    railroad station in Alt-Eiche

  • A
    woman and her companion in Katowice

The
details of the Gleiwitz radio station incident 
include:

On
the night of 31 August 1939, a small group of German operatives
dressed in Polish uniforms and led by Naujocks seized the Gleiwitz
station and broadcast a short anti-German message in Polish (sources
vary on the content of the message). The Germans’ goal was to make
the attack and the broadcast look like the work of anti-German Polish
saboteurs.

To
make the attack seem more convincing, the Germans used human corpses
to pass them off as Polish attackers. They murdered Franciszek
Honiok, a 43-year-old unmarried German Silesian Catholic farmer known
for sympathizing with the Poles. He had been arrested the previous
day by the Gestapo. He was dressed to look like a saboteur, then
killed by lethal injection, given gunshot wounds, and left dead at
the scene so that he appeared to have been killed while attacking the
station. His corpse was subsequently presented to the police and
press as proof of the attack.

  1. The
    minutes of the high command of the Italian government –
    subsequently approved by Mussolini himself – 
    admitted that
    violence on the Greek-Albanian border was carried out by Italians
    and falsely blamed on the Greeks, as an excuse for Italy’s 1940
    invasion of Greece.

  1. Nazi
    general Franz Halder also testified at the Nuremberg trials that
    Nazi leader Hermann Goering 
    admitted to
    setting fire to the German parliament building in 1933, and then
    falsely blaming the communists for the arson.

  1. Soviet
    leader Nikita Khrushchev 
    admitted in
    writing that the Soviet Union’s Red Army shelled the Russian
    village of Mainila in 1939 – while blaming the attack on Finland –
    as a basis for launching the “Winter War” against Finland.
    Russian president Boris Yeltsin 
    agreed that
    Russia had been the aggressor in the Winter War.

  1. The
    Russian Parliament, current Russian president Putin and former
    Soviet leader Gorbachev all 
    admit that
    Soviet leader Joseph Stalin ordered his secret police to execute
    22,000 Polish army officers and civilians in 1940, and then falsely
    blamed it on the Nazis.

  1. The
    British government 
    admits that
    – between 1946 and 1948 – it bombed 5 ships carrying Jews who
    were Holocaust survivors attempting to flee to safety in Palestine
    right after World War II, set up a fake group called “Defenders of
    Arab Palestine”, and then had the psuedo-group falsely claim
    responsibility for the bombings (and see 
    thisthis and this).

  1. Israel admits that
    in 1954, an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs
    in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then
    left behind “evidence” implicating the Arabs as the culprits
    (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to
    identify the bombers, and several of the Israelis later confessed)
    (and see 
    this and this).

The
U.S. Army does not believe this is an isolated incident. For example,
the U.S. Army’s School of Advanced Military Studies 
said of
Mossad (Israel’s intelligence service):

Ruthless
and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make
it look like a Palestinian/Arab act
.”

And
former Israeli Prime Moshe Minister 
admitted in
his diary:

I
have been meditating on the long chain of 
false
incidents and hostilities we have invented
,
and on the many clashes we have provoked which cost us so much blood
….

  1. The
    CIA 
    admits that
    it hired Iranians in the 1950′s to pose as Communists and stage
    bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its
    democratically-elected prime minister.

(10)
The Turkish Prime Minister 
admitted that
the Turkish government carried out the 1955 bombing on a Turkish
consulate in Greece – also damaging the nearby birthplace of the
founder of modern Turkey – and blamed it on Greece, for the purpose
of inciting and justifying anti-Greek violence.

The
Economist 
notes:

Starting
in the 1950s Turkey’s deep state sponsored killings, engineered
riots, colluded with drug traffickers, staged “false flag”
attacks and organised massacres of trade unionists. Thousands died in
the chaos it fomented.

  1. The
    British Prime Minister 
    admitted to
    his defense secretary that he and American president Dwight
    Eisenhower approved a plan in 1957 to carry out attacks in Syria and
    blame it on the Syrian government as a way to effect regime change.

  1. The
    former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the 
    former
    head of Italian counterintelligence
     admit
    that 
    NATO,
    with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings
    in Italy and other European countries in the 1950s through the 1980s
    and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for
    their governments in Europe in their fight against communism
    .

(13)
As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: 
“You
had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people,
unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was
quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian
public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security”
 … so
that “a state of emergency could be declared, so people would
willingly trade part of their freedom for the security”
 (and
see 
this)
(Italy and other European countries subject to the terror campaign
had joined NATO before the bombings occurred). And watch 
this
BBC special
.
They also allegedly carried out terror attacks in 
France,
Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal,
the UK
,
and other countries.

The
CIA also stressed to the head of the Italian program that Italy
needed to use the program to 
control internal uprisings.

False
flag attacks carried out pursuant to this program include – by way
of example only:

    In
    1960, American Senator George Smathers 
    suggested that
    the U.S. launch “a false attack made on Guantanamo Bay which would
    give us the excuse of actually fomenting a fight which would then
    give us the excuse to go in and [overthrow Castro]”.

  1. Official
    State Department documents show that, in 1961, the head of the Joint
    Chiefs and other high-level officials 
    discussed blowing
    up a consulate in the Dominican Republic in order to justify an
    invasion of that country. The plans were not carried out, but they
    were all discussed as serious proposals.

(15)
As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents
show that in 1962, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a
plan to 
blow
up AMERICAN airplanes
 (using
an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also
to 
commit
terrorist acts on American soil
,
and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of
Cuba. See the following 
ABC
news report
the
official documents
;
and watch 
this
interview 
with
the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC’s World News
Tonight with Peter Jennings. This plan was
subsequently 
admitted again
in other declassified government documents.

Provocations
considered by the Joint Chiefs of Staff 
included:

Sink
ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals for mock-victims ….

***

3.
A “Remember the Maine” incident could be arranged in several
forms:

a.
We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba.

b.
We could blow up a drone (unmanned) vessel anywhere in the Cuban
waters. We could arrange to cause such incident in the vicinity of
Havana or Santiago as a spectacular result of Cuban attack from the
air or sea, or both. The presence of Cuban planes or ships merely
investigating the intent of the vessel could be fairly compelling
evidence that the ship was taken under attack. The nearness to Havana
or Santiago would add credibility especially to those people that
might have heard the blast or have seen the fire. The US could follow
up with an air/sea rescue operation covered by US fighters to
“evacuate” remaining members of the non-existent crew. Casualty
lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national
indignation.

4.
We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area,
in other Florida cities and even in Washington.

The terror
campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the
United States. We could sink a boatload of Cubans enroute to Florida
(real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban
refugees in the United States even to the extent of wounding in
instances to be widely publicized. Exploding a few plastic bombs in
carefully chosen spots, the arrest of Cuban agents and the release of
prepared documents substantiating Cuban involvement also would be
helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible government.

***

6.
Use of MIG type aircraft by US pilots could provide additional
provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping and
destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type planes would be
useful as complementary actions. An F-86 properly painted would
convince air passengers that they saw a Cuban MIG, especially if the
pilot of the transport were to announce such fact. The primary
drawback to this suggestion appears to be the security risk inherent
in obtaining or modifying an aircraft. However, reasonable copies of
the MIG could be produced from US resources in about three months.

***

8.
it is possible to create an incident which will
demonstrate
convincingly that a Cuban-aircraft has attacked and
shot down a chartered civil airliner en route from the United States
to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be
chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba, The
passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or
any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering
a non-scheduled flight.

a.
An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact
duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA
proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the
duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and
would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under
carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be
converted to a drone.

b.
Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be
scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous
point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum
altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where
arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and
return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft
meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba
the drone will being transmitting on the inter-national distress
frequency a “MAY DAY” message stating he is under attack by Cuban
MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of
the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow
ICAO radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to “tell” the US
what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to “sell”
the incident.

9.
It is possible to create an incident which will make it appear that
Communist Cuban MIGs have destroyed a USAF aircraft over
international waters in an unprovoked attack.

a.
Approximately 4 or 5 F-101 aircraft-will be dispatched in trail from
Homestead AFB, Florida, to the vicinity of Cuba. Their mission will
be to reverse course and simulate fakir aircraft for an air defense
exercise in southern Florida. These aircraft would conduct variations
of these flights at frequent intervals. Crews would be briefed to
remain at least 12 miles off the Cuban coast; however, they would be
required to carry live ammunition in the event that hostile actions
were taken by the Cuban MiGs.

b.
On One such flight, a pre-briefed pilot would fly tail-end Charley at
considerable interval between aircraft. While near the Cuban Island
this pilot would broadcast that he had been Jumped by MIGs and was
going down. No other calls would be made. The pilot would then fly
directly west at extremely low altitude and land at a secure base, an
Eglin auxiliary. The aircraft would be met by the proper people,
quickly stored and given a new tail number. The pilot who had
performed the mission under an alias, would resume his proper
identity and return to his normal place of business. The pilot and
aircraft would then have disappeared.

c.
At precisely the same time that the aircraft was presumably shot down
a submarine or small surface craft would disburse F-101 parts,
parachute, etc., at approximately 15 to 20 miles off the Cuban coast
and depart.

U.S.
government documents declassified in October 2017 
admitted that
a very high-level 1962 meeting of U.S. government officials –
separate from the Joint Chiefs of Staff – also discussed:

The
possibility of 
U.S.
manufacture or acquisition of 
Soviet aircraft ….
There is a possibility that such aircraft could be used in a
deception operation designed to confuse enemy planes in the air, to
launch a surprise attack against enemy installations or in
 a
provocation operation in which Soviet aircraft would appear to attack
U.S. or friendly installations in order to provide an excuse for U.S.
intervention
.

And see
this
.

  1. In
    1963, the U.S. Department of Defense wrote a paper 
    promoting attacks
    on nations within the Organization of American States – such as
    Trinidad-Tobago or Jamaica – and then falsely blaming them on
    Cuba.

  1. The
    U.S. Department of Defense also 
    suggested covertly
    paying a person in the Castro government to attack the United
    States: “The only area remaining for consideration then would be
    to bribe one of Castro’s subordinate commanders to initiate an
    attack on Guantanamo.”

  1. A
    U.S. Congressional committee 
    admitted that
    – as part of its “Cointelpro” campaign – the FBI had
    used 
    many provocateurs
    in the 1950s through 1970s to carry out violent acts and falsely
    blame them on political activists.

  1. top Turkish
    general 
    admitted that
    Turkish forces burned down a mosque on Cyprus in the 1970s and
    blamed it on their enemy. He 
    explained:
    “In Special War, certain 
    acts
    of sabotage are staged and blamed on the enemy
     to
    increase public resistance. We did this on Cyprus; we even burnt
    down a mosque.” In response to the surprised correspondent’s
    incredulous look the general said, “I am giving an example”.

(20)
declassified 1973
CIA document 
reveals a
program to train foreign police and troops on how to make booby
traps, pretending that they were training them on how
to 
investigate terrorist
acts:

The
Agency maintains liaison in varying degrees with foreign
police/security organizations through its field stations ….

[CIA
provides training sessions as follows:]

a.
Providing trainees with 
basic
knowledge in the uses of commercial and military demolitions and
incendiaries
 as
they may be applied in terrorism and industrial sabotage operations.

b.
Introducing the trainees to 
commercially
available materials and home laboratory techniques
,
likely to he used in the manufacture of explosives and incendiaries
by terrorists or saboteurs.

c.
Familiarizing the trainees with the concept of 
target
analysis and operational planning
 that
a saboteur or terrorist must employ.

d.
Introducing the trainees to booby trapping devices and techniques
giving
 practical
experience
 with
both manufactured and improvised devices 
through
actual fabrication
.

***

The
program provides the trainees with 
ample
opportunity to develop basic familiarity and use proficiently through
handling, preparing and applying the various explosive charges,
incendiary agents, terrorist devices and sabotage techniques
.

  1. The
    German government 
    admitted (and see
    this
    )
    that, in 1978, the German secret service detonated a bomb in the
    outer wall of a prison and planted “escape tools” on a prisoner
    – a member of the Red Army Faction – which the secret service
    wished to frame the bombing on.

  1. A
    Mossad agent 
    admits that,
    in 1984, Mossad planted a radio transmitter in Gaddaffi’s compound
    in Tripoli, Libya which broadcast fake terrorist transmissions
    recorded by Mossad, in order to frame Gaddaffi as a terrorist
    supporter. Ronald Reagan bombed Libya immediately thereafter.

  1. The
    South African Truth and Reconciliation Council 
    found that,
    in 1989, the Civil Cooperation Bureau (a covert branch of the South
    African Defense Force) approached an explosives expert and asked him
    “to participate in an operation aimed at discrediting the ANC [the
    African National Congress] by bombing the police vehicle of the
    investigating officer into the murder incident”, thus framing the
    ANC for the bombing.

  1. An
    Algerian diplomat and several officers in the Algerian
    army 
    admit that,
    in the 1990s, the Algerian army frequently massacred Algerian
    civilians and then blamed Islamic militants for the killings (and
    see 
    this
    video
    ;
    and see Agence France-Presse, 9/27/2002, 
    French
    Court Dismisses Algerian Defamation Suit Against Author
    ).

  1. In
    1993, a bomb in Northern Ireland killed 9 civilians. Official
    documents from the Royal Ulster Constabulary (i.e. the British
    government) 
    show that
    the mastermind of the bombing was a British agent, and that the
    bombing was designed to inflame sectarian tensions. And
    see 
    this and this.

  1. The
    United States Army’s 1994 publication 
    Special
    Forces Foreign Internal Defense Tactics Techniques and Procedures
    for Special Forces
     –
    updated in 2004 – 
    recommends employing
    terrorists and using false flag operations to destabilize leftist
    regimes in Latin America. False flag terrorist attacks were carried
    out in Latin America and other regions as part of the CIA’s “
    Dirty
    Wars
    “.
    And 
    see
    this
    .

(27)
Similarly, a CIA “psychological operations” manual prepared by a
CIA contractor for the Nicaraguan Contra rebels 
noted the
value of assassinating someone on your own side to create a “martyr”
for the cause. The manual was 
authenticated by
the U.S. government. The manual received so much publicity from
Associated Press, Washington Post and other news coverage that –
during the 1984 presidential debate – President Reagan
was 
confronted with
the following question on national television:

At
this moment, we are confronted with the extraordinary story of a CIA
guerrilla manual for the anti-Sandinista contras whom we are backing,
which advocates not only assassinations of Sandinistas but the 
hiring
of criminals to assassinate the guerrillas we are supporting in order
to create martyrs.

  1. A
    Rwandan government inquiry 
    admitted that
    the 1994 shootdown and murder of the Rwandan president, who was from
    the 
    Hutu tribe
    – a murder blamed by the Hutus on the rival 
    Tutsi tribe,
    and which led to the massacre of more than 800,000 Tutsis by Hutus –
    was committed by 
    Hutu soldiers
    and falsely blamed on the Tutis.

  1. An
    Indonesian government fact-finding team investigated violent riots
    which occurred in 1998, and determined that “
    elements
    of the military had been involved in the riots, some of which were
    deliberately provoked
    ”.

  1. Senior
    Russian Senior military and intelligence officers 
    admit that
    the KGB blew up Russian apartment buildings in 1999 and falsely
    blamed it on Chechens, in order to justify an invasion of Chechnya
    (and see 
    this
    report
     and this
    discussion
    ).

  1. As
    reported by the 
    New
    York Times
    BBC and Associated
    Press
    ,
    Macedonian officials admit that in 2001, the government murdered 7
    innocent immigrants in cold blood and pretended that they were Al
    Qaeda soldiers attempting to assassinate Macedonian police, in order
    to join the “war on terror”. They lured foreign migrants into
    the country, executed them in a staged gun battle, and then claimed
    they were a unit backed by Al Qaeda intent on attacking Western
    embassies”. Specifically, Macedonian authorities had lured the
    immigrants into the country, and then – after killing them –
    posed the victims with planted evidence – “bags of uniforms and
    semiautomatic weapons at their side” – to show Western
    diplomats.

  1. At
    the July 2001 G8 Summit in Genoa, Italy, black-clad thugs
    were 
    videotaped getting
    out of police cars, and were 
    seen by
    an Italian MP carrying “iron bars inside the police station”.
    Subsequently, senior police officials in Genoa 
    admitted that
    police planted two Molotov cocktails and faked the stabbing of a
    police officer at the G8 Summit, in order to justify a 
    violent
    crackdown
     against
    protesters.

  1. The
    U.S. 
    falsely
    blamed Iraq
     for
    playing a role in the 9/11 attacks – as shown by a 
    memo
    from the defense secretary
     –
    as one of the 
    main
    justifications
     for
    launching the Iraq war.
    Even
    after the 9/11 Commission 
    admitted that
    there was no connection, Dick Cheney 
    said that
    the evidence is “overwhelming” that al Qaeda had a relationship
    with Saddam Hussein’s regime, that Cheney “probably” had
    information unavailable to the Commission, and that the media was
    not ‘doing their homework’ in reporting such ties. Top U.S.
    government officials now 
    admit that
    the Iraq war was really launched for oil … not 9/11 or weapons of
    mass destruction.

Despite
previous “lone wolf” claims, many U.S. government officials
now 
say that
9/11 was state-sponsored terror; but Iraq was 
not the
state which backed the hijackers. (Many U.S. officials
have 
allegedthat
9/11 was a false flag operation by rogue elements of the U.S.
government; but such a claim is beyond the scope of this discussion.
The key point is that the U.S. falsely blamed it on Iraq, when
it 
knew Iraq
had nothing to do with it.). 

(Additionally,
the 
same
judge who has shielded the Saudis
 for
any liability for funding 9/11 has awarded a default judgment against
Iran for 
$10.5
billion for carrying out 9/11
 …
even though no one seriously believes that Iran had any part in
9/11.)

  1. Although
    the FBI now admits that the 2001 anthrax attacks were carried out by
    one or more U.S. government scientists, a senior FBI official says
    that the FBI was actually 
    told to
    blame the Anthrax attacks on Al Qaeda by White House
    officials
     (remember
    what the anthrax letters 
    looked
    like
    ).
    Government officials also confirm that the white House 
    tried
    to link the anthrax to Iraq
     as
    a justification for regime change in that country. And 
    see
    this
    .

  1. According
    to the 
    Washington
    Post
    ,
    Indonesian police admit that the Indonesian military killed American
    teachers in Papua in 2002 and blamed the murders on a Papuan
    separatist group in order to get that group listed as a terrorist
    organization.

  1. The
    well-respected former Indonesian president also 
    admits that
    the government probably had a role in the Bali bombings.

  1. Police
    outside of a 2003 European Union summit in Greece were
    filmed 
    planting
    Molotov cocktails on a peaceful protester
    .

(38)
In 2003, the U.S. Secretary of Defense 
admitted that
interrogators were authorized to use the following method:

False
Flag: Convincing the detainee that individuals from a country other
than the United States are interrogating him.

While
not a traditional false flag 
attack,
this deception could lead to former detainees – 
many
of whom were tortured
 –
attacking the country falsely blamed for the interrogation and
torture.

  1. Former
    Department of Justice lawyer John Yoo 
    suggested in
    2005 that the US should go on the offensive against al-Qaeda, having
    “our intelligence agencies create a 
    false
    terrorist organization
    .
    It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps,
    and fundraising operations. It could 
    launch fake
    terrorist operations
     and
    claim credit for real terrorist strikes, helping to sow confusion
    within al-Qaeda’s ranks, causing operatives to doubt others’
    identities and to question the validity of communications.”

  1. Similarly,
    in 2005, Professor John Arquilla of the Naval Postgraduate School –
    a renowned US defense analyst credited with developing the concept
    of ‘netwar’ – 
    called
    for
     western
    intelligence services to
     create
    new “pseudo gang” terrorist groups
    ,
    as a way of undermining “real” terror networks. According to
    Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh, Arquilla’s
    ‘pseudo-gang’ strategy was, Hersh reported, 
    already
    being implemented
     by
    the Pentagon:

    Under
    Rumsfeld’s new approach, I was told, US military operatives would
    be permitted to pose abroad as corrupt foreign businessmen seeking
    to buy contraband items that could be used in nuclear-weapons
    systems. In some cases, according to the Pentagon advisers, 
    local
    citizens could be recruited and asked to join up with guerrillas or
    terrorists

The
new rules will enable the Special Forces community to set up what it
calls ‘action teams’ in the target countries overseas which can
be used to find and eliminate terrorist organizations. 
‘Do
you remember the right-wing execution squads in El Salvador?’ the
former high-level intelligence official asked me, referring to the
military-led gangs that committed atrocities in the early
nineteen-eighties. ‘We founded them and we financed them,’ he
said. ‘The objective now is to recruit locals in any area we want.
And we aren’t going to tell Congress about it.’ A former military
officer, who has knowledge of the Pentagon’s commando capabilities,
said, ‘We’re going to be riding with the bad boys.’”

(41)
United Press International 
reported in
June 2005:

U.S.
intelligence officers are reporting that some of the insurgents in
Iraq are using recent-model Beretta 92 pistols, but the pistols seem
to have had their serial numbers erased. The numbers do not appear to
have been physically removed; the pistols seem to have come off a
production line without any serial numbers. Analysts suggest the lack
of serial numbers indicates that the weapons were intended for
intelligence operations or terrorist cells with substantial
government backing. Analysts speculate that these guns are probably
from either Mossad or the CIA. Analysts speculate that agent
provocateurs may be using the untraceable weapons even as U.S.
authorities use insurgent attacks against civilians as evidence of
the illegitimacy of the resistance.

  1. In
    2005, 
    British
    soldiers
     dressed
    as Arabs were caught by Iraqi police after a shootout against the
    police. The British soldiers shot two Iraqi policemen, 
    killing
    one
    .
    The soldiers apparently 
    possessed
    explosives
    ,
    and were 
    accused of
    attempting to 
    set
    off bombs
    .
    While none of the soldiers admitted that they were carrying out
    attacks, British soldiers and a column of 10 British tanks stormed
    the jail they were held in, 
    broke
    down a wall of the jail, and busted them out
    .
    The extreme measures used to free the soldiers – rather than have
    them face questions and potentially stand trial – could be
    considered an admission.

  1. Undercover
    Israeli soldiers 
    admitted in
    2005 to throwing stones at other Israeli soldiers so they could
    blame it on Palestinians, as an excuse to crack down on peaceful
    protests by the Palestinians.

  1. Quebec
    police 
    admitted that,
    in 2007, thugs carrying rocks to a peaceful protest were actually
    undercover Quebec police officers (and 
    see
    this
    ).

  1. A
    2008 US Army special operations field manual 
    recommends that
    the U.S. military use surrogate non-state groups such as
    “paramilitary forces, individuals, businesses, foreign political
    organizations, resistant or insurgent organizations,
    expatriates, 
    transnational
    terrorism adversaries, disillusioned transnational terrorism
    members
    ,
    black marketers, and other social or political ‘undesirables.’”
    The manual specifically acknowledged that U.S. special operations
    can involve both counterterrorism and “Terrorism” (as well as
    “transnational criminal activities, including narco-trafficking,
    illicit arms-dealing, and illegal financial transactions.”)

(46)
The former Italian 
Prime
Minister, President, and head of Secret Services
 (Francesco
Cossiga) 
advised the
2008 minister in charge of the police, on how to deal with protests
from teachers and students:

He
should do what I did when I was Minister of the Interior … 
infiltrate
the movement with agents provocateurs
 inclined
to do anything …. And after that, with the strength of the gained
population consent, … 
beat
them for blood and beat for blood
 also
those teachers that incite them. Especially the teachers. Not the
elderly, of course, but the girl teachers yes.

  1. An
    undercover officer 
    admitted that
    he infiltrated environmental, leftwing and anti-fascist groups in 22
    countries. Germany’s federal police chief 
    admitted that
    – while the undercover officer worked for the German police – he
    acted illegally during a G8 protest in Germany in 2007 and committed
    arson by setting fire during a subsequent demonstration in Berlin.
    The undercover officer spent many years 
    living
    with
     violent
    “Black Bloc” anarchists.

  1. Denver
    police 
    admitted that
    uniformed officers deployed in 2008 to an area where alleged
    “anarchists” had planned to wreak havoc outside the Democratic
    National Convention ended up getting into a melee with two
    undercover policemen. The uniformed officers didn’t know the
    undercover officers were cops.

  1. At
    the G20 protests in London in 2009, a British member of
    parliament 
    saw plain
    clothes police officers attempting to incite the crowd to violence.

  1. The
    oversight agency for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police 
    admitted that
    – at the G20 protests in Toronto in 2010 – undercover police
    officers were arrested with a group of protesters. Videos and photos
    (see 
    this and this,
    for example) show that violent protesters wore very similar boots
    and other gear as the police, and carried police batons. The Globe
    and Mail 
    reports that
    the undercover officers planned the targets for violent attack, and
    the police failed to stop the attacks.

  1. Egyptian
    politicians 
    admitted (and see
    this
    )
    that government employees looted priceless museum artifacts 2011 to
    try to discredit the protesters.

  1. Austin
    police 
    admit that
    3 officers infiltrated the Occupy protests in that city.
    Prosecutors 
    admit that
    one of the undercover officers purchased and constructed illegal
    “lock boxes” which ended up getting many protesters arrested.

  1. In
    2011, a Colombian colonel 
    admitted that
    he and his soldiers had lured 57 innocent civilians and killed them
    – after dressing many of them in uniforms – as part of a scheme
    to claim that Columbia was eradicating left-wing terrorists. And 
    see
    this
    .

  1. Rioters
    who discredited the peaceful protests against the swearing in of the
    Mexican president in 2012 
    admitted that
    they were paid 300 pesos each to destroy everything in their path.
    According to Wikipedia, photos also 
    show the
    vandals waiting in groups behind police lines prior to the violence.

  1. On
    November 20, 2014, Mexican agent provocateurs were transported by
    army vehicles to participate in the 2014 Iguala mass kidnapping
    protests, as was 
    shown by
    videos and pictures distributed via social networks.

  1. The
    highly-respected writer for the Telegraph Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
    says that the head of Saudi intelligence – Prince Bandar –
    recently 
    admitted that
    the Saudi government controls “Chechen” terrorists.

(57) Two
members of the Turkish parliament
high-level
American sources
 and
others admitted that the Turkish government – a NATO country –
carried out the chemical weapons attacks in Syria and falsely blamed
them on the Syrian government; and high-ranking Turkish
government 
admitted on
tape plans to carry out attacks and blame it on the Syrian
government.

  1. The
    former Director of the NSA and other American government
    officials 
    admit said
    that the U.S. is a huge supporter of terrorism. Jimmy Carter’s
    National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski 
    admitted on
    CNN that the U.S. 
    organized
    and supported Bin Laden and the other originators of “Al Qaeda”
    in the 1970s
     to
    fight the Soviets. The U.S. and its allies have been 
    supporting Al
    Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist groups for many decades, and
    providing them arms, money and logistical support
    in 
    LibyaSyriaMaliBosniaChechnyaIran,
    and 
    many
    other countries
    .
    U.S. allies are also directly responsible
    for 
    creating and supplying ISIS.

It’s
gotten so ridiculous that a U.S. Senator has introduced a “
Stop
Arming Terrorists Act”
,
and U.S. Congresswoman – who introduced a similar bill in the House
– 
says:
“For years, the U.S. government has been supporting armed militant
groups working directly with and often under the command of terrorist
groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda in their fight to overthrow the Syrian
government.”

  1. Government
    officials on 
    both
    sides
     of
    the conflict, as well as the snipers who actually pulled the
    trigger, all 
    admit that
    shots were fired on 
    both sides
    – killing both government officials and anti-government protesters
    in Ukraine – to create maximum chaos and destabilization.

  1. Speaking
    of snipers, in a secret recording, Venezuelan generals 
    admit that
    they will deploy snipers to shoot protesters, but keep the marksmen
    well-hidden from demonstrator and the reporters covering the events
    so others would be blamed for the deaths.

  1. Burmese
    government officials 
    admitted that
    Burma (renamed Myanmar) used false flag attacks against Muslim and
    Buddhist groups within the country to stir up hatred between the two
    groups, to prevent democracy from spreading.

  1. Israeli
    police were again 
    filmed in
    2015 dressing up as Arabs and throwing stones, then turning over
    Palestinian protesters to Israeli soldiers.

  1. Britain’s
    spy agency has 
    admitted (and see
    this
    )
    that it carries out “digital false flag” attacks on
    targets, 
    framing
    people
     by
    writing offensive or unlawful material … and blaming it on the
    target.

  1. The
    CIA has 
    admitted that
    it uses viruses and malware from Russia and other countries to carry
    out cyberattacks and blame other countries.

  1. U.S.
    soldiers have 
    admitted that
    if they kill innocent Iraqis and Afghanis, they then “drop”
    automatic weapons near their body so they can 
    pretend they
    were militants.

  1. German
    prosecutors 
    admit that
    a German soldier disguised himself as a Syrian refugee and planned
    to shoot people so that the attack would be blamed on asylum
    seekers.

(67)
Police frame innocent people for crimes they didn’t commit. The
practice is so well-known that the New York Times 
noted in
1981:

In
police jargon, a throwdown is a weapon planted on a victim.

Newsweek reported in
1999:

Perez,
himself a former [Los Angeles Police Department] cop, was caught
stealing eight pounds of cocaine from police evidence lockers. After
pleading guilty in September, he bargained for a lighter sentence by
telling an appalling story of attempted murder and
“throwdown”–police
slang for a weapon planted by cops to make a shooting legally
justifiable
.
Perez said he and his partner, Officer Nino Durden, shot an unarmed
18th Street Gang member named Javier Ovando, then 
planted
a semiautomatic rifle on the unconscious suspect and claimed that
Ovando had tried to shoot them
during
a stakeout.

Wikipedia notes:

As
part of his plea bargain, Pérez implicated scores of officers from
the Rampart Division’s anti-gang unit, describing 
routinely beating
gang members,
 planting
evidence on suspects, falsifying reports and covering up unprovoked
shootings
.

(As
a side note – and while not technically false flag attacks –
police have been busted 
framing
innocent people in many other ways
,
as well.)

(68)
A former U.S. intelligence officer recently 
alleged:

Most
terrorists are false flag terrorists or are created by our own
security services.

He
has himself 
admitted to
carrying out a false flag attack.

  1. The
    head and special agent in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles
    office 
    said that
    most terror attacks are committed by the CIA and FBI as false flags.

(70)
The 
Director of
Analytics at the interagency Global Engagement Center housed at the
U.S. Department of State, also an adjunct professor at George Mason
University, where he teaches the graduate course National Security
Challenges in the Department of Information Sciences and Technology,
a former branch chief in the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center, and an
intelligence advisor to the Secretary of Homeland Security (J.D.
Maddox) 
notes:

Provocation
is one of the most basic, but confounding, aspects of
warfare. 
Despite
its sometimes obvious use, it has succeeded consistently against
audiences around the world, for millennia, to compel war
.
A well-constructed provocation narrative mutes even the most vocal
opposition.

***

The
culmination of a strategic provocation operation invariably reflects
a narrative of victimhood: we
are the victims of the enemy’s unforgivable atrocities.

***

In
the case of strategic provocation 
the
deaths of an aggressor’s own personnel are a core tactic of the
provocation
.

***

The
persistent use of strategic provocation over centuries – and its
apparent importance to war planners – begs the question of its
likely use by the US and other states in the near term.

(71)
Leaders throughout history have acknowledged the “benefits” of of
false flags to justify their political agenda:

Terrorism
is the best political weapon
 for
nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.

Adolph
Hitler

Why
of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the
leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a
simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or
a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship
… Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to 
tell
them they are being attacked
,
and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the
country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

Hermann
Goering, Nazi leader.

The
easiest way to gain control of a population is to 
carry
out
 acts
of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal
security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin

Postscript
1: It is not just “modern” nations which have launched false flag
attacks. For example, a Native American from one tribe (Pomunkey)
murdered a white Englishwoman living in Virginia in 1697 and then
falsely blamed it on 
second tribe
(Piscataway). But he later 
admitted in
court that he was not really Piscataway, and that he had been paid by
a provocateur from a 
third tribe
(Iroquois) to kill the woman as a way to start a war between the
English and the Piscataway, thus protecting the profitable Iroquois
monopoly in trade with the English.

Postscript
2: On multiple occasions, atrocities or warmongering are falsely
blamed on the enemy as a justification for war … when no
such event ever occurred
. This is more like a “fake flag”
than a “false flag”, as no actual terrorism occurred.

For
example:

  • The
    NSA 
    admits that
    it 
    lied about
    what really happened in the 
    Gulf
    of Tonkin incident
     in
    1964 … manipulating data to make it look like North Vietnamese
    boats fired on a U.S. ship so as to create a false justification for
    the Vietnam war

  • One
    of the central lies used to justify the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq
    after Iraq invaded Kuwait was the 
    false
    statement
     by
    a young Kuwaiti girl that 
    Iraqis
    murdered Kuwaiti babies
     in
    hospitals. Her statement was arranged by a Congressman who knew that
    she was actually the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the U.S.
    – who was desperately trying to lobby the U.S. to enter the war –
    but the Congressman 
    hid
    that fact from the public and from Congress

  • nother
    central lie used to justify the Gulf War was the statement that 
    a
    quarter of a million Iraqi troops were massed on the border with
    Saudi Arabia
     (see
    also
     this
    article
    )

  • Pulitzer
    prize-winning journalist Ron Suskind 
    reported that
    the White House ordered the CIA to forge and backdate a document
    falsely linking Iraq with Muslim terrorists and 9/11 … and that
    the CIA complied with those instructions and in fact created the
    forgery, which was then used to justify war against Iraq. And
    see 
    this and this

  • Time
    magazine 
    points
    out
     that
    the claim by President Bush that Iraq was attempting to buy “yellow
    cake” Uranium from Niger:

had
been checked out — and debunked — by U.S. intelligence a year
before the President repeated it.

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

* Op WashingtonBlog wordt ook verwezen naar een ander artikel op Newsweek:

MainstreamMedia Admits that False Flags Are Real

Last
month, Newsweek 
ran an
article headlined:

U.S. GOVERNMENT PLANNED FALSE FLAG ATTACKS TO START WAR WITH SOVIET UNION, JFK DOCUMENTS SHOW Zie wat deze link betreft ook: ‘Newsweek erkent ‘false flag’ operatie van de VS tegen de Sovjet Unie……

————————————

Voorts zie ‘Onderbroekbom (25 december 2009) een enorm onzin verhaal, weer zijn we voorgelogen…….

WannaCry niet door Noord-Korea ‘gelanceerd!’

FBI, de spin in het Russiagate web……..

‘Russiagate’ een complot van CIA, FBI, Hillary Clinton en het DNC………..

Syrië: nieuwe gifgasaanval als ‘false flag’ operatie tegen Syrisch bewind in voorbereiding……..

VS geeft toe dat er geen bewijs is voor het gebruik van gifgas ‘door Assad’, ofwel: alweer ‘fake news’ van de massamedia doorgeprikt!

Oost-Ghouta, wat je niet wordt verteld

Ghouta: een gifgas false flag en VS chef Guterres eist staakt het vuren van pro-Syrische strijdgroepen op Oost-Ghouta……

Assad heeft geen gifgas gebruikt tegen de Syrische bevolking!

BBC World Service en BNR met ‘fake news’ over Ghouta……..

US Aggression in Syria – an Imperialist Blueprint

Foreign Ministry: Some Western officials are complicit in the crimes of terrorists against civilians in Damascus and its countryside

SOHR, het orgaan dat door de reguliere media wordt aangehaald i.z. Syrië, is gevestigd in Coventry

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

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…..)