Mitch Henriquez, de 2 nog vervolgde agenten behoeven wat OM betreft niet vervolgd te worden en ongeoorloofd overleg schuldigen……..

Het volgende is een samenvatting van een artikel over zwarte piet dat ik gisteren plaatste, een artikel overgenomen van De Doorbraak. In dat artikel kwam ook de moord op Mitch Henriquez ter sprake en het feit dat de 2 van de 5 agenten die nog vervolgd worden voor de moord op Henriquez, wat betreft het OM vrijuit gaan, ‘daar ze al genoeg gestraft zijn……..’

De zaak Mitch Henriquez is te belangrijk om de volgende (voor mij een paar nieuwe) feiten onvermeld te laten, hier de bewerking van dit artikel geschreven door Mathijs van de Sande:

Op maandag komt het volgende nieuws binnen: in het proces tegen de Haagse agenten die Mitch Henriquez’ dood op hun geweten hebben, wordt door het OM geen enkele straf geëist. Op basis van de ronduit absurde stelling dat Henriquez ook had kunnen overlijden als er geen nekklem op hem was toegepast, betoogt men dat het de agenten in kwestie niet echt is aan te rekenen. Weliswaar hebben zij Henriquez mishandeld en buitenproportioneel veel geweld gebruikt bij zijn arrestatie, zo geeft ook de Officier van Justitie toe. Maar door alle commotie die inmiddels rond de zaak is ontstaan, zijn de agenten daar inmiddels wel genoeg voor gestraft.

Het is niet onwaarschijnlijk dat men Henriquez op een heel andere manier had benaderd als hij wit was geweest. Kunnen we niet op z’n minst vaststellen dat zowel het OM als de politie inconsistent zijn in hun benadering en behandeling van verdachten?

Het heeft er alle schijn van dat de zaak-Henriquez op alle mogelijke manieren werd gefrustreerd. Het OM gebruikte beeldmateriaal van inferieure kwaliteit terwijl er betere beelden beschikbaar waren. Hangende het onderzoek werd het de verdachte agenten toegestaan om met elkaar te overleggen via een appgroep. En diverse politici – waaronder de toenmalige Haagse burgemeester Van Aartsen – waren er als de kippen bij om de agenten te verdedigen, nog voordat het onderzoek was afgerond. Het lijkt erop, met andere woorden, dat de agenten in kwestie actief werden en worden geholpen…………..

Zie ook: ‘Nekklem: politie maakte alweer een dodelijk slachtoffer middels deze martelmethode…..

Haagse politie zwaar nalatig bij arrestatie, man overleden………..

Mitch Henriquez en de verstikkende behandeling die hij van de Haagse politie kreeg: rellen in de Schilderswijk…….

Mitch Henriques vermoord middels verstikking…… Zelfs zijn strottenhoofd was gebroken!!

Mitch Henriquez: Bouman gaf moordende agenten baangarantie, ongeacht de uitkomst van onderzoek………

Hoe bedoelt u, dat het ministerie van Veiligheid (ha! ha!) en Justitie, niet met de nabestaanden meeleeft???!!!

Gerard Bouman (Nationale Politie) wil politiestaat…………..

Van der Steur blijft nekklem en daarmee martelen en moord toestaan, de volgende dode valt onder zijn verantwoordelijkheid!’

Nekklem moet verboden worden, aldus slachtoffer!!

Van Aartsen niet over de dood van Mitch Henriquez en de rol van de Haagse politie daarin………..

Nekklem martelmethode gepropageerd bij Argos………..

Bouman is blij dat er een onderzoek naar de nekklem komt…….. AUW!!!!

Mitch Henriquez, slachtoffer van marteling middels nekklem:  of hoe men alweer zwaar onrecht zal ‘rechtspreken…….’‘ 

Mitch Henriquez, slachtoffer van marteling middels nekklem: of hoe men alweer zwaar onrecht zal ‘rechtspreken…….’

Nog slecht 2 van de 5 agenten die verantwoordelijk zijn voor de dood van Mitch Henriquez moeten terechtstaan en dat onherkenbaar, waarmee al de indruk wordt gewekt dat ze onschuldig zijn en zelfs slachtoffer zijn van ‘kwaadwillende lieden…….’

Afgelopen maandag werd er gemeld dat Henriquez waarschijnlijk hartklachten had en dat dit de oorzaak van zijn dood was…… Alsof je daar een moord mee onderuit kan halen, immers die hartverlamming zou het directe gevolg zijn van het ongelofelijke brute optreden van de bewuste 5 agenten……..

De 5 agenten probeerden bovendien de boel een oor aan te naaien, door te zeggen dat Henriquez niet dood was toen ze hem in de politiebus legden, daarmee stellend dat het niet nodig was een ambulance op te roepen. Ze zouden zogenaamd richting ziekenhuis zijn gereden…… Terwijl een ambulance direct eerste hulp had kunnen geven en gezien de afstand in een paar minuten ter plekke had kunnen zijn……. Ofwel: je zou hier ook nog eens kunnen aanvoeren dat zware nalatigheid door 5 agenten tot de dood van Henriquez heeft geleid…….

Afgelopen dinsdag werd er gemeld dat Henriquez waarschijnlijk door stress was overleden, aldus een pathologische leugenaar van het NFI….. Weer: als dit al zo zou zijn, hebben die 5 agenten deze dodelijke stress veroorzaakt met een overdaad aan grof geweld, waarmee ze alsnog schuldig zijn aan moord, of minstens doodslag……..

Hoe is het mogelijk dat 5 agenten zonder morren meewerkten aan het onmenselijk geweld tegen 1 persoon, t.w. Mitch Henriquez…..?????

De politie zou eens grondig doorgelicht moeten worden op psychopathie, immers wie stompt een man die niets meer kan doen op het gezicht, waarbij ook nog eens pepperspray werd gebruikt……..

Zie ook: ‘Nekklem: politie maakte alweer een dodelijk slachtoffer middels deze martelmethode…..

        en: ‘Haagse politie zwaar nalatig bij arrestatie, man overleden………..

        en: ‘Mitch Henriquez en de verstikkende behandeling die hij van de Haagse politie kreeg: rellen in de Schilderswijk…….

       en: ‘Mitch Henriques vermoord middels verstikking…… Zelfs zijn strottenhoofd was gebroken!!

       en: ‘Mitch Henriquez: Bouman gaf moordende agenten baangarantie, ongeacht de uitkomst van onderzoek………

       en: ‘Nekklem: zelfs de dood van Mitch Henriquez is niet genoeg, om deze (dodelijke) marteling te verbieden….. Hoe bedoelt u, dat het ministerie van Veiligheid (ha! ha!) en Justitie, niet met de nabestaanden meeleeft???!!!

       en: ‘Gerard Bouman (Nationale Politie) wil politiestaat…………..

       en: ‘Van der Steur blijft nekklem en daarmee martelen en moord toestaan, de volgende dode valt onder zijn verantwoordelijkheid!’

       en: ‘Nekklem moet verboden worden, aldus slachtoffer!!

       en: ‘Van Aartsen niet over de dood van Mitch Henriquez en de rol van de Haagse politie daarin………..

       en: ‘Nekklem martelmethode gepropageerd bij Argos………..

       en: ‘Bouman is blij dat er een onderzoek naar de nekklem komt…….. AUW!!!!

       en: ‘Mitch Henriquez, slachtoffer van marteling middels nekklem:  of hoe men alweer zwaar onrecht zal ‘rechtspreken…….’‘ 

Clinton te kakken gezet: Brazile (Democratische Partij VS) draagt haar boek op aan Seth Rich, het vermoorde lid van DNC die belastende documenten lekte

Donna Brazile was ten tijde van de campagne van Hillary Clinton interim voorzitter was van de Democratic National Committee (DNC), het hoogste bestuursorgaan van de Democratische Partij. Zij bekleedde die functie daar de eerdere voorzitter Wasserman Schultz en Obama een wanbeleid hadden gevoerd en de organisatie met een grote schuld kwam te zitten….. Een schuld die Clinton voor macht in de organisatie inloste………

Brazile heeft een boek geschreven over deze tijd: “Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House”. In tegenstelling tot Hillary fans, stelt Brazile dat Clinton tijdens de voorverkiezing (om de presidentskandidaat voor de Democratische Partij te bepalen) vals spel heeft gespeeld. Zoals al vaker op deze plek is gesteld, de documenten die dit aantoonden werden niet door de Russen gelekt maar door een medewerker van Clinton, die zo gefrustreerd was over het verraad van Clinton, dat hij de documenten lekte die dit aantoonden…….

Deze man, Seth Rich, werd daarna vermoord, zogenaamd tijdens een straatroof, echter waarbij zelfs de door Rich gedragen sieraden en geld niet werden gestolen…..

Brazile stelt dan ook dat ze daarna bang was voor haar leven, immers ook zij zag dat Clinton de boel belazerde en was het daar niet mee eens……. Brazile draagt haar boek mede op aan Seth Rich, die zij kende van haar werk voor de DNC.

Hier het ontluisterende verhaal geschreven door Tyler Durden, zoals door Anti-Media gebracht, eerder gepubliceerd op Zero Hedge:

Donna
Brazile Dedicates Her Book to “Patriot” Seth Rich

November
7, 2017 at 8:46 am

Written
by 
Tyler
Durden

(ZHE) — After
a leaked excerpt from her new book “Hacks: The Inside Story of the
Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House”
revealed that Donna Brazile 
feared
for her life 
after
the murder of former DNC employee Seth Rich, Axios** has reported that
Brazile provides more grist for what her former political allies have
dismissed as “right wing conspiracy theories” in the book’s
introduction.

Nestled
among the usual platitudes about thanking friends and family, Brazile
dedicates her book to Rich’s memory, describing him as a close
colleague and “patriot.”

Rich
was murdered in July 2016, two weeks before Wikileaks released a
trove of emails stolen from the DNC’s servers that, among other
embarrassing details, suggested that the DNC was engaged in
widespread rigging of the 2016 Democratic primary to favor
“front-runner” Hillary Clinton.

In
loving memory of my father, Lionel Brazile Sr.; my beloved sister,
Sheila Brazioutlanle; my fearless uncles Nat, Floyd, and Douglas;
Harlem’s finest, my aunt Lucille; my friend and mentor, David
Kaufmann; my DNC colleague and patriot, Seth Rich; and my beloved
Pomeranian, Chip Joshua Marvin Brazile (Booty Wipes). I miss y’all.”

Rich,
27, a former data analyst at the DNC, was fatally shot while walking
home late at night in Washington, D.C. The police believe the
shooting was a robbery gone wrong. 
But
Brazile says in her book that she was “haunted” by Rich’s death
because she feared shadowy elements associated with the Clinton
campaign may have played a role in his death as retribution for
leaking the emails.

As
Newsweek points out, media reports had characterized Rich as a
low-level staffer, and his parents wrote in an opinion piece for The
Washington Post (WaPo) in May claiming the idea that their son leaked the
emails to Wikileaks was ridiculous because his position didn’t
grant him access to sensitive data.

Brazile
mentioned Rich during a Sunday appearance on ABC News’s This Week
with George Stephanopouloson Sunday. She told the host about her
critics: “They don’t know what it was like to be over the DNC
during this hacking. They don’t know what it’s like to bury a
child. I did: Seth Rich.”

During
the interview, Brazile softened her claims that the DNC rigged the
primary (though, tellingly, party leaders have said they will
reexamine the role of “joint-fundraising agreements” which
Brazile alleged helped the Clinton campaign assert financial
dominance over the DNC). She also said that her critics in the party
can “go to hell.”

I’m
not on the payroll, George. I care about my country. I care about our
democracy,” Brazile said. “And I say go to hell, because why am I
supposed to be the only person that is unable to tell my story?”

Through
spokesman Brad Bauman, the Rich family said in a statement, “Since
Seth was murdered, Donna Brazile has been a great friend to the Rich
family and has been extremely supportive of the family’s efforts to
find Seth’s killers.”

Of
course, Democrats have lined up to rebut Brazile’s claims. More
than 100 former Clinton campaign aids signed an open letter accusing
Brazile of falling for “Russia-fueled propaganda” in what appears
to be a feeble attempt to discredit her.

Already,
a trove of bombshell allegations included in the book have been
widely reported thanks to leaked excerpts, and a teaser chapter that
Brazile published as an essay in 
Politico.
For example, Brazile revealed that she considered replacing Clinton
and running mate Tim Kaine with Joe Biden and Corey Booker after
Clinton fainted at the 9/11 memorial. She also levied accusations
of 
sexism and racism at
former Clinton staffers, and – most shockingly of all – revealed
that the Clinton campaign took advantage of Debbie Wasserman
Schultz’s absentee leadership of the party to make the DNC
financially dependent on Clinton.

Glenn Greenwald 

@ggreenwald

Fox is promoting a Wednesday night interview on Tucker Carlson’s show with . . . Donna Brazile.

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

* Zie: ‘Campagne Clinton, smeriger dan gedacht…………‘ (met daarin daarin opgenomen de volgende artikelen: ‘Donna Brazile Bombshell: ‘Proof’ Hillary ‘Rigged’ Primary Against Bernie‘ en ‘Democrats in Denial After Donna Brazile Says Primary Was Rigged for Hillary‘)

** Axios is een nieuws en actualiteiten website in de VS.

Zie ook: ‘WikiLeaks: Seth Rich Leaked Clinton Emails, Not Russia

       en: ‘FBI, de spin in het Russiagate web……..

       en: ‘Hillary Clinton en haar oorlog tegen de waarheid…….. Ofwel een potje Rusland en Assange schoppen!

       en: ‘Murray, ex-ambassadeur van GB: de Russen hebben de VS verkiezingen niet gemanipuleerd

      en: ‘‘Russische manipulaties uitgevoerd’ door later vermoord staflid Clintons campagneteam Seth Rich……… AIVD en MIVD moeten hiervan weten!!

      en: ‘Obama gaf toe dat de DNC e-mails expres door de DNC werden gelekt naar Wikileaks….!!!!

Gerelateerd aan dit onderwerp:

      en: VS ‘democratie’ aan het werk, een onthutsende en uitermate humoristische video!

      en: ‘Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump

      en: ‘Hillary Clinton moet op de hoogte zijn geweest van aankoop Steele dossier over Trump……..

      en: ‘Flashback: Clinton Allies Met With Ukrainian Govt Officials to Dig up Dirt on Trump During 2016 Election

      en: ‘FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information

      en: ‘Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election

      en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media

      en: ‘CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

      en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

      en: ‘Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..

       en: ‘Rusland zou onafhankelijkheid Californië willen uitlokken met reclame voor borsjt…….

       en: ‘CIA deed zich voor als het Russische Kaspersky Lab, aldus Wikileaks Vault 8…..

       en: ‘Kajsa Ollongren (D66 vicepremier): Nederland staat in het vizier van Russische inlichtingendiensten……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

JFK de moord: de macht van de geheime diensten gecombineerd met die van het militair-industrieel complex

Het volgende artikel geschreven door Ray McGovern was nog niet gepubliceerd of Trump beloofde ook de rest van de JFK documenten vrij te geven, terwijl hij eerder onder druk van de CIA en NSA 300 pagina’s achterhield.

Daarmee was de kop van het McGovern artikel achterhaald, al moeten we eerst nog zien, of Trump kan leveren, immers de geheime diensten hebben hem bijna volledig in hun macht gekregen met de Russia-gate leugens*.

Verder een artikel met alweer toch een aantal nieuwe feiten, waaruit de conclusie bijna niet is te vermijden dat de CIA heeft meegewerkt aan de moord op J.F. Kennedy, uiteraard in opdracht en samenwerking met het militair-industrieel complex. Kennedy was van plan de aanwezige troepen uit Zuid-Vietnam terug te trekken, dat zou deze industrie een paar miljard dollar aan winst kosten…… Uiteraard was de mislukte invasie op Cuba een stevige plank aan de doodskist van Kennedy, men heeft hem nooit vergeven dat hij geen troepen stuurde naar Cuba om de gevangen genomen militairen te bevrijden, sterker nog: Kennedy ontsloeg de verantwoordelijken voor het Bay of Pigs incident…..

Truman, de ex-president plaatste een maand na de moord op Kennedy een artikel in de Washington Post, waarin hij pleitte de macht van de CIA aan banden te leggen, dit werd niet herhaald in de late editie van deze krant en werd gemeden door de rest van de reguliere media in de VS, terwijl Truman NB de CIA had opgezet in 1947……….

Lees het volgende (verder) prima artikel:

The
Deep State’s JFK Triumph Over Trump

October
30, 2017 at 9:27 am

Written
by 
Ray
McGovern

Fifty-four
years after President Kennedy’s assassination, the CIA and FBI
demanded more time to decide what secrets to keep hiding – and a
chastened President Trump bowed to their power, observes ex-CIA
analyst Ray McGovern.

(CN— It
was summer 1963 when a senior official of CIA’s operations
directorate treated our Junior Officer Trainee (JOT) class to an
unbridled rant against President John F. Kennedy. He accused
JFK, among other things, of rank cowardice in refusing to send U.S.
armed forces to bail out Cuban rebels pinned down during the
CIA-launched invasion at the Bay of Pigs, blowing the chance to drive
Cuba’s Communist leader Fidel Castro from power.

It
seemed beyond odd that a CIA official would voice such scathing
criticism of a sitting President at a training course for those
selected to be CIA’s future leaders. I remember thinking to
myself, “This guy is unhinged; he would kill Kennedy, given the
chance.”

Our
special guest lecturer looked a lot like E. Howard Hunt, but more
than a half-century later, I cannot be sure it was he. Our notes
from such training/indoctrination were classified and kept under lock
and key.

At
the end of our JOT orientation, we budding Agency leaders had to make
a basic choice between joining the directorate for substantive
analysis or the operations directorate where case officers run spies
and organize regime changes (in those days, we just called the
process overthrowing governments).

I
chose the analysis directorate and, once ensconced in the brand new
headquarters building in Langley, Virginia, I found it strange that
subway-style turnstiles prevented analysts from going to the
“operations side of the house,” and vice versa. Truth be told, we
were never one happy family.

I
cannot speak for my fellow analysts in the early 1960s, but it never
entered my mind that operatives on the other side of the turnstiles
might be capable of assassinating a President – the very President
whose challenge to do something for our country had brought many of
us to Washington in the first place. But, barring the emergence of a
courageous whistleblower-patriot like Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea
Manning or Edward Snowden, I do not expect to live long enough to
learn precisely who orchestrated and carried out the assassination of
JFK.

And
yet, in a sense, those particulars seem less important than two main
lessons learned: (1) If a President can face down intense domestic
pressure from the power elite and turn toward peace with perceived
foreign enemies, then anything is possible. The darkness of
Kennedy’s murder should not obscure the light of that basic truth;
and (2) There is ample evidence pointing to a state execution of a
President willing to take huge risks for peace. While no
post-Kennedy president can ignore that harsh reality, it remains
possible that a future President with the vision and courage of JFK
might beat the odds – particularly as the American Empire
disintegrates and domestic discontent grows.

I
do hope to be around next April after the 180-day extension for
release of the remaining JFK documents. But – absent a gutsy
whistleblower – I wouldn’t be surprised to see in April,
Washington
Post
 banner
headline much like the one that appeared Saturday: 
JFK
files: The promise of revelations derailed by CIA, FBI.”

The
New Delay Is the Story

You
might have thought that almost 54 years after Kennedy was murdered in
the streets of Dallas – and after knowing for a quarter century the
supposedly final deadline for releasing the JFK files – the CIA and
FBI would not have needed a six-month extension to decide what
secrets that they still must hide.

Journalist
Caitlin Johnstone 
hits
the nail on the head
 in
pointing out that the biggest revelation from last week’s limited
release of the JFK files is “the fact that the FBI and CIA still
desperately need to keep secrets about something that happened 54
years ago.”

What
was released on Oct. 26, was a tiny fraction of what had remained
undisclosed in the National Archives. To find out why, one needs
to have some appreciation of a 70-year-old American political
tradition that might be called “fear of the spooks.”

That
the CIA and FBI are still choosing what we should be allowed to see
concerning who murdered John Kennedy may seem unusual, but there is
hoary precedent for it.  After JFK’s assassination on Nov. 22,
1963, the well-connected Allen Dulles, whom Kennedy had fired as CIA
director after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, got himself appointed to the
Warren Commission and took the lead in shaping the investigation of
JFK’s murder.

By
becoming 
de
facto
 head
of the Commission, Dulles was perfectly placed to protect himself and
his associates, if any commissioners or investigators were tempted to
question whether Dulles and the CIA played any role in killing
Kennedy. When a few independent-minded journalists did succumb to
that temptation, they were immediately branded – you guessed it –
“conspiracy theorists.”

And
so, the big question remains: Did Allen Dulles and other
“cloak-and-dagger” CIA operatives have a hand in John Kennedy’s
assassination and subsequent cover-up? In my view and the view of
many more knowledgeable investigators, the best dissection of the
evidence on the murder appears in James Douglass’s 2008 book, 
JFK
and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.

After
updating and arraying the abundant evidence, and conducting still
more interviews, Douglass concludes that the answer to the big
question is Yes. Reading Douglass’s book today may help
explain why so many records are still withheld from release, even in
redacted form, and why, indeed, we may never see them in their
entirety.

Truman:
CIA a Frankenstein?

When
Kennedy was assassinated, it must have occurred to former President
Harry Truman, as it did to many others, that the disgraced Allen
Dulles and his associates might have conspired to get rid of a
President they felt was soft on Communism – and dismissive of the
Deep State of that time. Not to mention their vengeful desire to
retaliate for Kennedy’s response to the Bay of Pigs fiasco. (Firing
Allen Dulles and other CIA paragons of the Deep State for that fiasco
simply was not done.)

Exactly
one month after John Kennedy was killed, the 
Washington
Post
 published
an op-ed by Harry Truman titled “Limit CIA Role to Intelligence.”
The first sentence read, “I think it has become necessary to take
another look at the purpose and operations of our Central
Intelligence Agency.”

Strangely,
the op-ed appeared only in the 
Post’s early
edition on Dec. 22, 1963. It was excised from that day’s later
editions and, despite being authored by the President who was
responsible for setting up the CIA in 1947, the all-too-relevant
op-ed was ignored in all other major media.

Truman
clearly believed that the spy agency had lurched off in what Truman
thought were troubling directions. He began his op-ed by
underscoring “the original reason why I thought it necessary to
organize this Agency … and what I expected it to do.” It would be
“charged with the collection of all intelligence reports from every
available source, and to have those reports reach me as President
without Department ‘treatment’ or interpretations.”

Truman
then moved quickly to one of the main things clearly bothering
him. He wrote “the most important thing was to guard against
the chance of intelligence being used to influence or to lead the
President into unwise decisions.”

It
was not difficult to see this as a reference to how one of the
agency’s early directors, Allen Dulles, tried to trick President
Kennedy into sending U.S. forces to rescue the group of invaders who
had landed on the beach at the Bay of Pigs in April 1961 with no
chance of success, absent the speedy commitment of U.S. air and
ground support. The planned mouse-trapping of the then-novice
President Kennedy had been underpinned by a rosy “analysis”
showing how this pin-prick on the beach would lead to a popular
uprising against Fidel Castro.

Wallowing
in the Bay of Pigs

Arch-Establishment
figure Allen Dulles was offended when young President Kennedy, on
entering office, had the temerity to question the CIA’s Bay of Pigs
plans, which had been set in motion under President Dwight
Eisenhower. When Kennedy made it clear he would 
not approve
the use of U.S. combat forces, Dulles set out, with supreme
confidence, to give the President no choice except to send U.S.
troops to the rescue.

Coffee-stained
notes handwritten by Allen Dulles were discovered after his death and
reported by historian Lucien S. Vandenbroucke. In his notes, Dulles
explained that, “when the chips were down,” Kennedy would be
forced by “the realities of the situation” to give whatever
military support was necessary “rather than permit the enterprise
to fail.”

The
“enterprise” which Dulles said could not fail was, of course, the
overthrow of Fidel Castro. After mounting several failed operations
to assassinate Castro, this time Dulles meant to get his man, with
little or no attention to how Castro’s patrons in Moscow might
react eventually. (The next year, the Soviets agreed to install
nuclear missiles in Cuba as a deterrent to future U.S. aggression,
leading to the Cuban Missile Crisis).

In
1961, the reckless Joint Chiefs of Staff, whom then-Deputy Secretary
of State George Ball later described as a “sewer of deceit,”
relished any chance to confront the Soviet Union and give it, at
least, a black eye. (One can still smell the odor from that
sewer in many of the documents released last week.)

But
Kennedy stuck to his guns, so to speak. A few months after the
abortive invasion of Cuba — and his refusal to send the U.S.
military to the rescue — Kennedy fired Dulles and his
co-conspirators and told a friend that he wanted to “splinter the
CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds.” Clearly,
the outrage was mutual.

When JFK
and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters
 came
out, the mainstream media had an allergic reaction and gave it almost
no reviews. It is a safe bet, though, that Barack Obama was given a
copy and that this might account in some degree for his continual
deference – timorousness even – toward the CIA.

Could
fear of the Deep State be largely why President Obama felt he had to
leave the Cheney/Bush-anointed CIA torturers, kidnappers and
black-prison wardens in place, instructing his first CIA chief, Leon
Panetta, to become, in effect, the agency’s lawyer rather than take
charge? Is this why Obama felt he could not fire his clumsily
devious Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who had to
apologize to Congress for giving “clearly erroneous” testimony
under oath in March 2013? Does Obama’s fear account for his
allowing then-National Security Agency Director Keith Alexander and
counterparts in the FBI to continue to mislead the American people,
even though the documents released by Edward Snowden showed them –
as well as Clapper – to be lying about the government’s
surveillance activities?

Is
this why Obama fought tooth and nail to protect CIA Director John
Brennan by trying to thwart publication of the comprehensive Senate
Intelligence Committee investigation of CIA torture, which was

based
on original Agency cables, emails, and headquarters memos?
[See 
here and here.]

The
Deep State Today

Many
Americans cling to a comforting conviction that the Deep State is a
fiction, at least in a “democracy” like the United States.
References to the enduring powers of the security agencies and other
key bureaucracies have been essentially banned by the mainstream
media, which many other suspicious Americans have come to see as just
one more appendage of the Deep State.

But
occasionally the reality of how power works pokes through in some
unguarded remark by a Washington insider, someone like Sen. Chuck
Schumer, D-New York, the Senate Minority Leader with 36 years of
experience in Congress. As Senate Minority Leader, he also is an 
ex
officio
 member
of the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is supposed to oversee
the intelligence agencies.

During
a Jan. 3, 2017 interview with MSNBC’S Rachel Maddow, Schumer told
Maddow nonchalantly about the dangers awaiting President-elect Donald
Trump if he kept on “taking on the intelligence community.” She
and Schumer were discussing Trump’s sharp tweeting regarding U.S.
intelligence and evidence of “Russian hacking” (which both
Schumer and Maddow treat as flat fact).

Schumer said:
“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have
six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.  So even for a
practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he’s being really
dumb to do this.”

Three
days after that interview, President Obama’s intelligence chiefs
released a nearly evidence-free “assessment” claiming that the
Kremlin engaged in a covert operation to put Trump into office,
fueling a “scandal” that has hobbled Trump’s presidency. On
Monday, Russia-gate special prosecutor Robert Mueller indicted
Trump’s one-time campaign manager Paul Manafort on unrelated money
laundering, tax and foreign lobbying charges, apparently in the hope
that Manafort will provide incriminating evidence against Trump.

So,
President Trump has been in office long enough to have learned how
the game is played and the “six ways from Sunday” that the
intelligence community has for “getting back at you.” He appears
to be as intimidated as was President Obama.

Trump’s
awkward acquiescence in the Deep State’s last-minute foot-dragging
regarding release of the JFK files is simply the most recent sign
that he, too, is under the thumb of what the Soviets used to call
“the organs of state security.”

Ray
McGovern works with the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in
inner-city Washington.  During his 27-year career at CIA, he
prepared the 
President’s
Daily Brief
 for
Nixon, Ford, and Reagan, and conducted the one-on-one morning
briefings from 1981 to 1985.  He is co-founder of Veteran
Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

By Ray
McGovern
 /
Republished with permission / 
Consortium
News
 / Report
a typo

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

* Zie o.a.: ‘Walls Closing in on Russiagate Conspiracy Theorists: Evidence Mounts That DNC Emails Provided to WikiLeaks By Inside Source‘ en: ‘WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Drops Russiagate Shell!!!‘ (video).

Zie ook: ‘Martin Luther King jr. vermoord door de overheid, aldus rechter……..

       en: ‘J.F. Kennedy vermoord door Lyndon Johnson en z’n maten in misdaad, geheime diensten en politiek…..

       en: ‘Georganiseerde misdaad en overheid, wat is het verschil tussen die twee? Een uiterst hilarische lezing van Michael Parenti over de moord op JFK!‘     

       en: ‘Newsweek erkent ‘false flag’ operatie van de VS tegen de Sovjet Unie……

       en: ‘Kabinet ‘wil kunnen hacken’, zonder daar melding van te maken………. Hoe bedoelt u, ‘politiestaat??’

Zie ook de volgende links, die weliswaar niets met Kennedy te maken hebben maar die wel aangeven hoe groot de macht de reguliere VS media en vooral de geheime diensten hebben, iets dat weer eens goed duidelijk werd door de leugens over ‘Russiagate’ (alleen dat woord is al een leugen op zich en werd voor het eerst gebruikt voor de Russische oligarchen die eind 90er jaren hun geld witwasten in het westen):

             ‘Hillary Clinton moet op de hoogte zijn geweest van aankoop Steele dossier over Trump……..‘ (een vervolg op het bovenstaande bericht)

       en: ‘Flashback: Clinton Allies Met With Ukrainian Govt Officials to Dig up Dirt on Trump During 2016 Election

       en: ‘FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information

       en: ‘Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election

       en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media

       en: ‘CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

       en: ‘Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..

       en: ‘Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump

       en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media

       en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

       en: ‘‘Russiagate’ een verhaal van a t/m z westers ‘fake news…..’

       en: ‘New York Times met schaamteloze anti-Russische propaganda en ‘fake news….’

       en: ‘BBC World Service: Rusland heeft VS verkiezingen gemanipuleerd……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Hoe Clinton en haar team de wereld op scherp hebben gezet >> Did Hillary Scapegoat Russia to Save Her Campaign?

       en: ‘Brekend nieuws: door Rusland betaalde reclames van Shell, Calvé pindakaas, AH boerenkool en Hema worst >> doel Rutte 3 ten val te brengen!!!

PS: Kennedy en dan met name zijn broer Robert gingen ook behoorlijk tekeer tegen de maffia en volgens een aantal deskundigen zou de maffia hebben samengewerkt met de geheime dienst. Lee Harvey Oswald, die Kennedy als zou hebben vermoord, werd door Jack Ruby doodgeschoten, deze zou lid van de maffia zijn geweest of daar hechte banden mee hebben gehad………

Journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia vermoord op Malta, onderdeel van de EU……..

Journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia deed onderzoek n.a.v. de Panama Papers, waarbij ze o.a. de regering van Malta beschuldigde van grootscheepse corruptie. Via de Panama Papers kwam ze uit bij de firma Mossack Fonseca*.

Na onderzoek van Galizia bleek dat de premier van Malta, Joseph Muscat** en twee van zijn medewerkers betrokken zijn bij een smerige deal, waarbij buitenlandse firma’s werden gelinkt aan deze drie figuren en paspoorten werden verkocht, waar Azerbeidzjan betalingen verrichtte…

   Daphne Caruana Galizia 2013Daphne Caruana Galizia 26 8 1964 – 16 10 2017

De zoon van Caruana Galizia, Matthew Caruana Galizia (zelf journalist), stelt dat de onderwereld innig is verbonden met de Maltese politiek, waarmee hij in feite stelt dat de autobom, die een eind aan het leven van zijn moeder maakte, met instemming van de ‘sociaaldemocratische’ premier en andere politici werd geplaatst……..

Voorts stelt Matthew dat de dood van zijn moeder niet tragisch is, daar spreek je van bij o.a. een auto-ongeluk, nee zijn moeder is een oorlogsslachtoffer, immers als je vuur en bloed om je heen hebt, is dat oorlog, aldus Matthew…….

Julian Assange heeft intussen € 20.000,– uitgeloofd voor de tip die naar de moordenaars leidt.

Het is overigens opvallend stil rond deze zaak, als het om de EU gaat: geen veroordeling na de moord op Caruana Galizia en geen aangekondigd onderzoek naar de corrupte regering van Malta……… Ach ja, als men maar lid blijft van de EU, is er geen vuiltje aan de lucht, zelfs niet als fascisten EU landen regeren, zoals dit in Hongarije en Polen het geval is………

Journalist
Leading Panama Papers Investigation Killed by Car Bomb Explosion

October
17, 2017 at 11:06 am

Written
by 
Anti-Media
Team

(ANTIMEDIA) Malta
 Following
Monday’s car bomb
 murder of
Daphne Caruana Galizia, the journalist leading the Panama Papers
investigation into corruption within the government of Malta,
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has offered a hefty reward to anyone
with information about the killing.

Outraged
to hear that Maltese investigative journalist+blogger Daphne Caruana
Galizia has been murdered this afternoon not far from her home with a
car bomb,” 
Assange wrote on
Twitter Monday night. 
“I
issue a €20k reward for information leading to the conviction of
her killers.”

Galizia,
who 
POLITICO recently referred
to
 as
a “
one-woman
WikiLeaks,”
 had
been a thorn in the side of the Maltese government for the last two
years. The journalist used information from the
 Panama
Papers
 —
the cache of 11.5 million internal documents from offshore law firm
Mossack Fonseca that were leaked in 2015 — to expose corruption
within Malta’s political class, as the 
Guardian highlighted Monday:

Her
most recent revelations pointed the finger at Malta’s prime
minister, Joseph Muscat, and two of his closest aides, connecting
offshore companies linked to the three men with the sale of Maltese
passports and payments from the government of Azerbaijan.”

Galizia,
who was 53 and leaves behind a husband and three sons, published her
final blog post barely half an hour before her death. One of the
reporter’s sons, Matthew, took to Facebook following the
murder,
 saying she
was killed because of her refusal to back down:

My
mother was assassinated because she stood between the rule of law and
those who sought to violate it, like many strong journalists. But she
was also targeted because she was the only person doing so.”

Continuing,
Matthew wrote that in the fight against corruption, “the
last person left standing is often a journalist”
 which,
ultimately makes them “the first person left dead.”

Matthew,
who is also a journalist, said his mother’s death “is not
tragic,” but rather that she was a casualty of war:

Tragic
is someone being run over by a bus. When there is blood and fire all
around you, that’s war. We are a people at war against the state
and organised crime, which have become indistinguishable.”

Creative
Commons
 / Anti-Media / Report
a typo

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



*   Mossack Fonseca ook in Nederland gevestigd, een firma die zoals de Panama Papers aantonen, betrokken is bij grootschalige belastingontduiking en witwassen.

** Joseph Muscat is een ‘sociaaldemocraat’ dan weet je het wel…. Zijn partij is de Partit Laburista, ofwel de ‘Maltese Partij van de Arbeid………’

Catalaanse onafhankelijkheid door een andere bril dan die van de reguliere westerse (massa-) media

Het volgende artikel nam ik over van Anti-Media, hierin een gesprek met een VS burger, die meer duidelijkheid geeft over de Catalaanse wil tot onafhankelijkheid.

Terecht wordt in dit artikel een ander beeld geschetst, dan de reguliere media u laten voorschotelen. Bijvoorbeeld dat de wil tot onafhankelijkheid inderdaad een streven is van het grootste deel van de Catalanen. Voorts wordt melding gemaakt van de fascisten die meeliepen in de demonstratie op 7 oktober jl. tegen de Catalaanse onafhankelijkheid…..

Eén van de redenen dat de Catalanen nu onafhankelijkheid wensen, is het feit dat de Spaanse premier Rajoy 14 statuten voor Catalaanse autonomie heeft geschrapt in 2006…….*

What
an American Citizen in Barcelona Wants You to Know About Catalonia

October
10, 2017 at 6:58 am

Written
by 
Anti-Media
Team

Anti-Media spoke
with Isabelle Bolla, an American woman who has lived in Catalonia for
the past two years.

(ANTIMEDIA) — On
October 1st, Catalonia held a 
disputed referendum
vote in an attempt to declare independence from Spain. On voting day,
Spanish police were 
documented using
excessive force against Catalans attempting to place their vote.
While the situation in Spain has recently garnered 
much
attention
 from
the media as it reaches a boiling point, tensions between the
governments of Catalonia and Spain have been building 
for
years
.

Just
yesterday, Spain’s ruling party made a 
veiled
threat
 to
assassinate the president of Catalonia, as shared in this tweet from
Julian Assange, who continues to be 
outspoken on
the issue.

a

Zie opmerking over deze video**

Julian Assange 🔹 @JulianAssange

EU silence has now led to this: Spain’s ruling political party just made a barely veiled threat to have Catalonia’s current president shot.

In
light of the 
recent
unrest
 in
Spain surrounding Catalonia’s vote for independence, we spoke by
email with Isabelle Bolla, an American woman who has lived in various
regions of Spain, including living in Catalonia for the past two
years. As an outsider who has spent considerable time in Spain,
Isabelle has a unique perspective on the situation from inside
Barcelona.

Can
you discuss the general atmosphere you have experienced recently in
Catalonia?

Over
the past month, I have seen mass mobilizations of people who have
peacefully gathered to affirm their desire to vote in a referendum.
Many have felt discontent with the Spanish state and its treatment of
Catalonia, and others want a say in their future. While not everyone
may agree or want independence, 80% of Catalans wanted the right to
vote on their future. Prior to October 1st, there was an energy in
the air of excitement. People were ready to vote. I ended up being in
a small town on the night before the election. Numerous people were
camping out and sleeping inside of the designated locations for
voting, to protect them from the possible threat of Guardia Civil
(Spanish national police) which had been deployed to cities and towns
all over the region. People were genuinely scared of what could
happen if the police showed up, but there was a feeling of excitement
– as some have waited their whole lives to vote.”

What
did you witness on the day the referendum was held? You mentioned a
feeling of excitement, did that continue throughout the day?

People
started lining up at 4am, and waited until the polling stations
opened at 9am. Luckily, no police were deployed to the location I was
in, so everything was peaceful and orderly. It was a normal and
completely democratic proc
ess. At
one point the voting systems completely crashed, as they did in ALL
voting stations all over Catalonia, as the Spanish government had
managed to shut them down with court orders. People resorted to
voting manually, and the vote went ahead nonetheless. I saw a 93 year
old man vote, and everyone clapped for him on his way out – it’s
incredible to think of the things he has likely seen in his life, and
that he made the morning walk to vote and have his voice heard.

I
returned to Barcelona the same day, and was filled with emotion at
the devastating brutality which occurred on behalf of the Spanish
police, and resulted in nearly 900 injuries. The videos which
followed only further demonstrated the volatility of the operation. I
attended a few manifestations in Plaza Catalunya and tried to check
out other local polling places, in which people were still officially
voting until 8pm.

Over
the past month, the Spanish state has censored the press, shut down
.CAT domains, sent in police forces, arrested government officials,
and gave the order for riot police to conduct themselves in a violent
manner to voters. Their strategy thus far has been questionable.”

What
happened during the pro-unity 
march held
on October 7th?

Yesterday
in Barcelona and Madrid people who oppose secession gathered to show
support for a united spain. While a majority of these people were
peaceful, it should be noted that there was a large amount
of 
Falange and
far-right attendees (such as 
Vox — another
right wing, anti immigrant, racist group) These groups are notably
fascist, and many were caught on camera doing Nazi salutes (which is
banned in many parts of Europe) and carrying pre-constitutional
Falange flags. Again, I am not alluding that the entire population
was fascist as that certainly wasn’t the case, but rather that
their presence was completely allowed and not explicitly banned,
which in my opinion is an issue in and of itself.

There
was a large turnout for pro-unity demonstration. I think many people
from all over Spain are hurt about what probably feels like the
dissolution of a marriage. It’s hard not to get personal, and feel
a range of emotions. I think that’s why it’s so crucial for both
sides to speak to each other, because ultimately a large standoff
will end up hurting the populations and civilians the most.

It
should also be stated that a majority of attendees were not from
Catalonia, but were 
bussed
in 
from
other regions of Spain. Bus options were available to anyone all over
Spain for a mere 34€. So a large population of those attending were
from other Spanish regions. I personally witnessed an influx of
busses throughout the day coming, and going.

I
also witnessed a car driving past my apartment, covered in Spanish
flags and blasting the “Marcha Real” on the speakers, which is
Franco’s national anthem and 
notoriously
fascist
.

I
would like to be clear again, that not all of the population there
was fascist, but the fascists were not DENOUNCED or told to leave –
which is problematic.

Just
last week
,
thousands gathered in Plaza del Sol in Madrid to sing “Cara Del
Sol,” another fascist tune indoctrinated into the youth during
Franco’s regime.

I
believe in peaceful assembly and peaceful protests, but the
appearance of these far-right exclusive and divisive groups calling
for “unity” only incites intimidation and fear, and produces the
opposite effect to many Catalans, and outsiders like myself.”

Can
you give an example of the difference in attitudes between the
Catalan people and the Spanish police?

On
October 3rd, I attended the “vaga general” which was a general
day of strike in Catalonia. It was called on by unions and approved
by the Catalan government, leading to an entire work stoppage. This
strike was called in solidarity with the Catalan people and against
the unproportional use of force demonstrated by Spanish police on
October 1st. As with all Catalan manifestations, the mood was festive
and it was completely peaceful. I think the force and aggressiveness
of Spanish police and the Spanish government has in turn had the
opposite effect it hoped for, and has only further invigorated the
separatist movement. Given the history in Catalonia, people here do
not react well to force or oppression, as it is reminiscent of life
merely 40 years ago. Another mobilization is called for this week,
and we will likely continue to see more.”

Catalans
attempted to vote in a democratic election for a referendum,
and 
succeeded.
But the Spanish government has maintained that this referendum vote
would not take place. Can you tell us what the referendum is for?

The
referendum was for the right of Catalans to vote if they wanted to
become an independent republic outside of Spain. As polls are
constantly fluctuating, the numbers on who supports independence are
unclear. What can be said is that 80% of the population supported a
referendum to solve the matter. Over the past few years, unofficial
non-binding referendums on the same matters did win overall
support 
— but
again, it’s hard to fully understand these numbers as whole. To get
a full scope, it would be wise to analyze voter turnouts as a whole
in regional and national elections, and cross reference them to
referendum elections. The pressures that Catalans had to deal with to
vote on October 1st should also be taken account. According to
Catalan officials, around 770,000 were unable to vote due to police
interference.

In
Catalonia, 5.3 million or so are eligible to vote in a population of
7.5 million, and around 4.9 are Catalans.. The average turnout has
been between 2-2.5 million people in many referendums, which should
already be a signal of alarm to the Spanish state that nearly half of
the population is voting in favor of independence 
— and
that there is a deep divide present.”

The
Spanish prime minister 
insists that
no referendum was held in Catalonia but officials say, according to
preliminary results, 90% voted for independence. Why does Catalonia
want independence from Spain?

Catalonia
wants independence because of many issues and a variety of reasons.
Many have to do with unfair treatment from the Spanish government,
and the fact that in 2006 PP and namely Spanish PM Mariano Rajoy
reneged on a previous promise made to Catalonia, and subsequently
canceled out nearly 14 statutes of autonomy the region was granted by
his predecessor. Stripping the autonomy of the region and turning its
back on Catalonia left many people very angry
. The following 2008
financial crisis further exasperated these sentiments.

It
also has to do with money, as many Catalans pay more in taxes than
what they receive back, leading them to borrow money from the Spanish
government to provide basic services for its citizens. While this is
always the precedent, that richer regions pay more in taxes;
Catalonia has all together 
paid
more
than
it’s wealthy European counterparts in Paris, London, etc.

I
believe it also boils down to identity, which is a VERY big factor.
Many Catalans do not necessarily feel Spanish, they 
identify as
Catalan.”

Prior
to this referendum, had there been previous effort on the part of the
Catalan government to reach out to the Spanish government to attempt
an agreement?

Over
the past 6 or 7 years, the Catalan government has made numerous
attempts to speak with the Spanish government to discuss more
autonomy, or even to try to agree on a question for a referendum. All
of these attempts have been shut down, leading the Catalan government
to respond with one binding question and referendum.

Studies
have shown that if more than one question was posited, or if Spain
had agreed on the question with Catalans many perhaps would have
voted to 
stay.
I don’t see that necessarily being the case after the events of the
past month, and after October 1st.

Here
in the U.S. almost everything that goes ‘wrong’ is blamed on
Russia. It looks like the 
media
is using Russia
 as
a scapegoat in this instance as well, claiming that Russian meddlers
are to blame for the Catalan crisis. Have you seen this in the media
where you are?

I
have briefly some some content alluding to collusion with Russia,
which seems to be the case worldwide now. As far as I know, these
parallels were drawn by the newspaper El Pais, whom also mentioned
that Julian Assange (who has been vocal about the Catalonia/Spain
situation) is also in works with Russia. While I have no doubt that
seeing a fractured Europe would serve Russia’s best interests, I am
highly speculative of Russia playing any kind of integral role in
matter. The call for a referendum, and the desire for independence
has no correlation to Russia, and it should be noted that mentioning
Russia or attempting to use Russia as a scapegoat is an easy way to
diminish or invalidate the opinions of millions of people.

With
your knowledge of events over the past week and your experience in
Spain, what do you think will happen over the next few days?

Well,
there have been many assumptions and analysis over the possible
endgame steps and strategies that will be implemented. I think the
Spanish government is going to measure which steps it can
incrementally implement to stop or put a halt to a declaration of
independence. Sedition charges, and arrests will likely be made over
the next week and could perhaps be it’s first way of cracking down.
Last week, Spain’s government passed a law which makes it easier
for companies to move their official headquarter base out of
Catalonia and into Spain, as a way of adding economical pressure to
the region.  

Following
this, a few companies and banks 
moved their
HQ address to Spanish cities, out of prudence and as a contingency
plan – although it should be noted that most companies actual
headquarters will remain here, and only the fiscal address has been
moved. Adding economical pressure, and following with a series of
arrests looks like the current course for now.

Up
to this point, the Spanish government has refused any outside
mediation and has also refused to engage in active civil discourse
and dialogue with the Catalan government while “independence is
still on the table.” Of course, this entire problem revolves around
independence, so it seems both governments have been unable to even
sit and meet properly for a discussion.”

Article
8 of the Spanish Constitution allows it to explicitly use its armed
forces to ensure the sovereignty and unity of the country. “The
mission of the Armed Forces, comprising the Army, the Navy and the
Air Force, is to guarantee the sovereignty and independence of Spain
and the constitutional order.”, 
Spanish
Consitution, Article 8
)

Alongside
article 8, it is likely that article 116 and 155 will be implemented
as well following a UDI. Article 116 quite literally invokes MARTIAL
LAW in three stages: Stage of Alarm, State of Emergency, and State of
Siege. (“An organic law shall regulate the states of alarm,
emergency and siege (martial law) and the corresponding competences
and limitations.”

– Article
116, Spanish Constitution
).

Article
155 would revoke the autonomy of a region, and remove the government
in power. The central government in Madrid would therefore presume
control over Catalonia economically and politically. Invoking article
155 has been dubbed the “nuclear option.” The Vice President of
Spain did confirm that this article would be implemented the same day
as a hypothetical UDI.

Both
of these articles will require a congressional majority to pass.

I
think the Catalan government will move to declare independence as it
promised the population it would do. The Catalan Parliament is the
legitimate representative body of Catalans, and they have the
internal power and legitimacy to declare independence. They are
seeking to declare it for a number of reasons, and because a UDI
(unilateral declaration of independence) would allow them to accept
mediation from foreign governments, and recognize Catalan statehood.
There attempts and calls for mediation have been ignored, and Spain
has refused any dialogue up to this point – so this undoubtedly
seems to be the way forward. It’s unclear yet if it will occur
incrementally or all at once.

Following
the UDI, it is highly likely that article 155/116 will come into
play, which is cause for concern. I fear further aggressive tactics
from the Spanish state will cause backlash in the region, and lead to
more strikes and mobilizations. People will absolutely take to the
streets.

I
believe the Spanish government will hold off on instituting 155 for
now UNTIL Catalonia declares independence, which is also likely to
occur in the next few days. It is not only plausible, but highly
likely that this move will trigger a deep disaccord with the
population, and lead to more demonstrations of passive resistance.

In
your opinion what is the ideal outcome for Catalonia?

I
think the ideal situation for Catalans and Catalonia would be
dialogue with the Spanish government with outside mediation, where
they can clearly have their voices heard, with a neutral mediator in
place. This is idealistic, and given how things have played out over
the past month it seems unlikely to happen. Ideally, the Spanish and
Catalan governments would work together towards understanding each
other and reaching an agreement that is suitable for both. Dialogue,
dialogue, dialogue. The main thing missing, is what would help the
situation the most. Countless MEPS, Nobel Peace Prize winners, and
countries have urged Catalonia and Spain to simply talk; but Spain
has refused to this point, choosing force and aggression, against
what it sees as a rebellion.

The
other ideal situation would be a compromise within the Spanish
government to either grant more autonomy, make it a state within a
Federal spain, or give permission to hold a legally binding
referendum (as the U.K did with Scotland.) None of these are
plausible with the current political trajectories in place, but they
would certainly be ideal.

Since
the former situations seem quite lofty and out of reach, then the
other best alternative would likely be the UDI. According to
international law, self-determination is in numerous international
treaties and does denote the legal right of a people to decide their
destiny in international order. With that said, the EU is largely
against secessionist movements, and cannot legally recognize an
independent state unless the parent state itself (Spain) has come to
an agreement or arrangement with the government seeking secession,
and has agreed to recognize their statehood – which is highly
unlikely to happen.

If
Catalonia does break free and leave the EU ( at least temporarily),
it will lose the protection of the EU, however this would leave it
open to mediation that it can legally accept. Just because it leaves
the EU, does not mean it would not be accepted back in.

What
is the most important thing about this situation that you think the
rest of the world needs to know?

Catalonia
is a very 
prosperous region
of Spain, and makes up nearly 22% of its GDP and 17% of its populace.
In 2016 it generated nearly 226 billion, in comparison with Portugal
which produced 180 billion (these numbers may not be exact – but
are close to the figures and estimates.) While no exact economical
analysis has been conducted on viability as an independent region, it
would be foolish to dismiss the overall power of the Catalan
population and region. Barcelona is and has always been one of the
most important ports in the Mediterranean, and the overall 14th most
important in Europe. It accounts for 25% of all exports from Spain,
while Madrid accounts for 11%. Catalonia also represents around 2% of
Europe’s overall GDP, so it is an economic and regional powerhouse.

I
think this is the biggest crisis both Spain and Europe have faced in
a long time, and it’s happening in a digital age which really
changes the way information is spread and received.

What
I can tell you personally is that the movement for secession is not
an extremist agenda; these are normal people, of all ages who just
want a democratic process to decide on a democratic future. A
majority of supporters hail from rural areas, and in metropolitan
cities, like Barcelona there is possibly less desire for it because
the population is mixed – but it is very real and it should not be
dismissed, ignored, or suffocated. I think that Spain has reached a
point of no return, and the current government has used aggressive
tactics which have backfired and left people in Catalonia feeling
more resentment to the central government, and feeling like their
government is not trying to listen to them. All people want here, is
to be heard 
— and for a chance to speak. And they
should have that.”

The
most critical moment for Catalonia 
arrives
in just a few hours
,
when President Carles Puigdemont is expected to issue a declaration
of independence, insisting on Catalonia’s wish to negotiate with
the Spanish government and the need for mediation. 

History
should not be repeated,” 
said Pablo
Casado, a spokesman for Spain’s governing People’s party, the day
before the declaration.

We
hope that tomorrow nothing will be declared, because perhaps the one
who declares it will end up like the one who declared it 83 years
ago.”

Puigdemont
is scheduled to 
speak today
at 6pm local time “to report on the current political situation”
as pressure grows amid warnings by the Spanish government against
secession.

Creative
Commons
 / Anti-Media / Report
a typo



Hoorde zojuist in het BBC Scotland radionieuws van 14.00 u., dat de Spaanse premier en fascist Rajoy de eerste stappen zal zetten tot het terugdraaien van de Catalaanse autonomie………..



** Let wel: de getoonde video is niet dezelfde als in het originele bericht, waar slechts 38 seconden te zien zijn van de video hierboven (de video in het origineel kan ik niet overnemen). In het origineel worden deze eerste seconden ondertiteld, hier de Engelse tekst: “We just saw last october 6 that the 83rd anniversary of Comapnys’ declaration of independence passed almost unnoticed. I believe history shouldn’t be repeated and lets hope tomorrow nothing will be declared, because maybe the one who declared it will end as the one who declared it 83 years ago”. >> Ofwel Hiermee waarschuwde deze fascist van de Partido Popular de president van Catalonië, Carles Puigdemont, dat ook hij vermoord kan worden, zoals de Catalaanse president Lluis Companys i Jover dat 83 jaar geleden overkwam, nadat hij de onafhankelijkheid van Catalonië had uitgeroepen………

Zie ook: Spaanse verkiezingen: Steven Adolf (schrijver, journalist en ‘Spanje kenner’) slaat de plank volkomen mis


       en: ‘Spaanse regering hekelt ‘gewelddadige protesten’ in Catalonië

       en: ‘Catalaanse politici tot lange straffen veroordeeld voor het houden van een referendum en dat in een ‘democratie…’


          en: Catalonië
onafhankelijk: waarom hoor je EU landen (en de EU zelf) niet over de
zware inperking van de democratie in Spanje?


        en: ‘Puigdemont de gevluchte Catalaanse politicus is gearresteerd door de Duitse politie…….

        en: ‘Duitse procureur generaal wil Puigdemont uitleveren……..

        en: ‘Puigdemont mag volgens de Duitse rechter worden uitgeleverd aan Spanje…… Alweer een zwarte dag voor de EU….


 
      en: ‘
Spain’s
Suppression of the Catalonia Independence Movement Is Backfiring

 
     
en:
Spanje
bewijst het gelijk van Catalonië’s wens voor
onafhankelijkheid……

 
     
en:
Spanje
denkt met fascistisch geweld de roep om onafhankelijkheid van
Catalonië de kop in te kunnen drukken…….

 
      en: ‘Spaanse
koning Felipe VI waant zich met commentaar op Catalaanse
onafhankelijkheidsstreven in lang vervlogen tijden……

        en:  ‘Timmermans (PvdA EU) over Catalonië: proportioneel geweld is soms gerechtvaardigd…….. AUW!!!

        en:
Timmermans
(PvdA EU): “There can be no human rights without the rule of
law….”

       en: ‘Bankenmaffia chanteert het Catalaanse volk……..

       en: ‘Rajoy neemt gas terug, maar verklaart in feite tegelijkertijd dat hij het Catalaanse parlement buiten werking zal stellen……….

       en: ‘Geert Mak over Catalonië: de Catalanen slaan aperte nonsens uit…….. Hoor wie het zegt… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘BBC World Service en hoogleraar Radboud met gekleurd ‘Catalaans commentaar…….’

       en: ‘Catalonië: Karel de Gucht >> de EU moet zich uitspreken tegen ondemocratisch Spaans geweld!

       en: ‘Catalonië en Puigdemont gefeliciteerd met de dikke overwinning van de onafhankelijkheid coalitie!

       en: ‘Catalonië: Spaanse koning Flip VI roept Catalanen in zijn kersttoespraak op tot verdraagzaamheid en en eenheid……..

De Gelderlander durft gruwelijke moord op transpersoon te bagatelliseren…….

De Doorbraak bracht afgelopen zaterdag o.a. een bericht over de Gelderlander, waarin de gruwelijke moord op een transpersoon (of: transgender).

Het artikel in de Gelderlander, waarop de schrijver van het artikel, Petra de Jong doelt werd geschreven door van Helden en van der Vegt. Overigens niet geheel vreemd, dit soort uiterst inhumane en onbeschofte berichtgeving in een blad als de Gelderlander, eerder een katholiek dagblad…. Immers ook onder ‘de geweldige’ paus Franciscus, zijn er nog steeds Priesters en bisschoppen die vooral in arme landen de haat tegen homo’s en transgenders aanjagen vanaf de kansel.

Lees het volgende ontluisterende artikel over twee figuren die blijkbaar nog in een ver, bekrompen verleden leven:

De
Gelderlander plaatst dehumaniserend stuk over vermoorde transvrouw

Op
maandag 2 oktober 2017 verscheen in De Gelderlander 
een
artikel
 van
de hand van Berrie van Helden en Eric van der Vegt over de gruwelijke
moord op transpersoon Bianca die sekswerk deed in Arnhem.

De
schrijvers van het artikel zijn het tijdperk van de
negentiende-eeuwse rondreizende “freak shows” duidelijk nog niet
ontgroeid. Het stuk hangt aaneen van ontmenselijkende terminologie,
schuimbekkend sensationalisme en een compleet gebrek aan respect voor
een medemens die op afschuwelijke wijze om het leven is gekomen.
Alles aan Bianca wordt in twijfel getrokken; van haar naam tot haar
leeftijd tot haar vrouwzijn (dat laatste meer dan eens).

Van
Helden en Van der Vegt lijken hun beeld van transpersonen te hebben
gebaseerd op een mengeling van shock docs uit de jaren negentig, iets
te veel bezoekjes aan de “shemale”-categorie van hun favoriete
pornosite en hun eigen losgeslagen fantasie. Het resultaat is een
stuk dat transpersonen tot weinig meer dan fascinerende (en in de
ogen van de schrijvers duidelijk ook afstotelijke) objecten maakt en
dat daarmee ronduit schadelijk is.


Sekswerker

Laten
we beginnen bij de kop van het stuk en de eerste misser. Beste Berrie
en Eric, als een woord ook gebruikt wordt in bedenkelijke
carnavalskrakers, dan kun je er gevoeglijk vanuit gaan dat je
misschien even op zoek moet naar een andere term. “Transseksueel”
kan niet meer, punt. Gebruik in plaats daarvan “transpersoon” of
“transvrouw”. Geen discussie, gewoon doen.

Het
woord “transvrouw” kennen de heren overigens wel, want ze
gebruiken het in de eerste zin van het stuk. Maar dan wel met
“zogeheten” ervoor. De zogeheten journalisten weten eigenlijk wel
hoe het hoort, maar hebben toch wat weerstand tegen dat politiek
correcte gedoe waarbij je mensen met respect behandelt.

Mochten
de heren zelfs sekswerkers met enige mate van respect willen
bejegenen, dan zouden ze eens gek kunnen doen en ook de term
“prostituee” kunnen droppen, omdat dit woord per definitie een
passieve betekenis heeft (geprostitueerde) en dus een gebrek aan
zelfbeschikking suggereert. “Sekswerker” is een goed alternatief.


Geweld

Vervolgens
maakt het stuk duidelijk dat Bianca met buitensporig veel geweld om
het leven is gebracht. Een buurtbewoner zag bloedvegen op de muur en
de dader liet een lang bloedspoor achter in de buurt. Heel eventjes
blijft de minachting achterwege. Zoveel geweld, dat verdient zelfs
een transvrouw niet [/sarcasme].

Extreem
geweld tegen transvrouwen die sekswerk doen, is helaas niet
ongebruikelijk. Mannen geilen op het idee van seks met een transvrouw
en worden vervolgens achteraf gewelddadig omdat ze het idee niet
kunnen verkroppen dat ze seks hebben gehad met iemand ‘die
eigenlijk een man is’ (hun beleving, niet de werkelijkheid). De
transvrouw moet die geïnternaliseerde extreme homohaat vervolgens
met de dood bekopen.


Schuld

Berrie
en Eric doen in de rest van het stuk hun uiterste best om tenminste
een deel van de schuld bij het slachtoffer neer te leggen, haar nog
verder te ontmenselijken en de mogelijke gedachtegang van de dader te
legitimeren naar de lezers toe. Ze noemen Bianca “een man met
vrouwelijke kenmerken”. Ze maken duidelijk dat Bianca mogelijk niet
helemaal eerlijk was over haar leeftijd (altijd een goede reden om
iemand een kopje kleiner te maken, nietwaar?). Ze vertellen ons dat
het bij transsekswerkers “in vrijwel alle gevallen om mannen gaat
die er door operaties en laserbehandelingen op en top uitzien als een
vrouw, maar die hun mannelijk geslachtsdeel hebben behouden”.
Hebben de heren hier onderzoek naar verricht en zo ja, met wat voor
onderzoeksmethode anders dan het raadplegen van de eigen
vooroordelen? De suggestie wordt gewekt dat de klant wellicht in de
veronderstelling verkeerde van doen te hebben met een ‘echte vrouw’
en dat hij werd ‘belazerd’ door Bianca.

Berrie
en Eric, ik heb nieuws voor jullie. Transvrouwen die sekswerk doen,
adverteren met het feit dat ze trans zijn. Daar is namelijk een markt
voor. Porno met transvrouwen die een penis hebben is extreem populair
en de meeste kijkers ervan zijn mannen die zichzelf als
heteroseksueel omschrijven. 


Transvrouwen die sekswerk doen, lopen een
onevenredig grote kans het slachtoffer te worden van extreem geweld
door klanten. Denken jullie werkelijk dat een transvrouw die
sekswerker is bij wijze van verrassing haar penis uit haar broek
haalt…?

Dit
nog even afgezien van de vraag hoe jullie eigenlijk weten wat Bianca
tussen haar benen had en waarom dat jullie zaak zou zijn. We hebben
het hier over iemand die net op afschuwelijke wijze om het leven is
gebracht. In welke werkelijkheid is het dan acceptabel om het over de
geslachtsdelen van de overledene te gaan hebben…? Zouden jullie je
eigen stuk nog eens willen lezen en je daarbij willen verplaatsen in
een van Bianca’s nabestaanden?


Riooljournalistiek

Er
is met dit stuk zo verschrikkelijk veel mis dat ik het volstrekt
onbegrijpelijk vind dat er niets is aangepast na reacties 
van
onder andere Mounir Samuel
,
diverse andere transactivisten en – aan een van de comments op de
site van De Gelderlander te zien – ook vaste lezers die niet zitten
te wachten op dit soort walgelijke riooljournalistiek.

Beste
redactie van De Gelderlander, haal dit vod in vredesnaam van jullie
site af, voor Bianca en voor alle andere transmensen die niets meer
van de maatschappij vragen dan als mens te worden behandeld. 


En
Berrie en Eric: houd het voortaan maar bij stukjes over
containerbrandjes, of onderwijs jezelf en leer begrijpen waarom heel
erg veel mensen terecht heel erg boos zijn over dit stuk.

Petra
de Jong

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

Zie ook:

Gedwongen sterilisatie voor transgenders in Japan


Transgenders verplicht gesteriliseerd in o.a Frankrijk en België……. Teken de petitie!‘ (deze petitie van juli vorig jaar is intussen gesloten)

VS centraal commando werkt in Syrië samen met IS en verklaarde Rusland de oorlog………

Afgelopen zondag werden 3 hoge Russische officieren in het oosten van Syrië vermoord bij ‘een aanval van IS……’ Deze officieren werden ofwel vermoord door speciale troepen van de VS, dan wel middels een door de VS gecontroleerde terreurgroep……. Deze moord kan gezien worden als een oorlogsverklaring van het centrale commando van de VS in Syrië…….

De VS wil de olievelden in oostelijk Syrië onder beheer brengen bij de Koerden, door een Koerdische ministaat in te richten, een ‘staat’ die uiteraard gecontroleerd zal worden door de VS…… Echter Syrië heeft alle belang bij deze olievelden, dit om de enorme schade te herstellen die is aangericht in de door de VS opgezette illegale oorlog tegen de democratische gekozen regering Assad….. Ter verduidelijking: de VS was al vanaf 2006 met de voorbereidingen bezig >> eerst een opstand organiseren die moest uitmonden in een staatsgreep tegen de regering Assad…… Echter hier liep het anders dan in Oekraïne, waar de VS dezelfde ‘tactiek’ volgde en daar wel succes mee had…..

Vorige week veroordeelde Rusland de VS voor het samenwerken met Al Qaida in de provincie Idlib*, afgelopen zondag beschuldigde Rusland de VS zelfs van het samenwerken met IS en gaf daar de bewijzen voor……

Voor de zoveelste keer is dus bewezen dat de VS enorme terreur uitoefent en niet alleen terreurgroepen bewapent en traint, maar nu zelfs met hen meevecht…… Niet alleen dat, maar de VS werkt nu zelfs samen met  de door haar bewapende psychopathische terroristen……..

Hoe lang kunnen de reguliere westerse (massa-) media en het grootste deel van de westerse politici de VS, ofwel de grootste terreurentiteit op aarde, blijven steunen door het fabriceren van doorzichtige leugens, of door het herhalen van leugens van de CIA en het Pentagon..??!!! (terwijl men de vuilbek vol heeft met beschuldigingen over nepnieuws, of ‘fake news’, gebracht door de alternatieve media…….)

Lees het volgende uitstekende artikel van Moon of Alabama, zoals dit werd geplaatst op Information Clearing House:

Syria
– U.S. CentCom Declares War On Russia

By
Moon Of Alabama

September
25, 2017 “Information
Clearing House
” –  Yesterday three high ranking Russian
officers were killed in an “ISIS attack” in eastern-Syrian.
It is likely that they were killed by U.S. special forces or
insurgents under U.S. special forces control. The incident will be
understood as a declaration of war.

The
U.S. Central Command in the Middle East wants the oil fields in
east-Syria under control of its proxy forces to set up and control a
U.S. aligned Kurdish mini-state in the area. The Syrian government,
allied with Russia, needs the revenues of the oil fields to rebuild
the country.

bigger


Last
week the Russians issued 
sharply
worded statements
 against
U.S. coordination with al-Qaeda terrorists in Idleb province and
warned of further escalation.


Yesterday
the Russian Ministry of Defense 
accused the
U.S. military in east-Syria of direct collaboration with the Islamic
State:

US
Army special units provide free passage for the Syrian Democratic
Forces (SDF) through the battle formations of Islamic State (IS,
formerly ISIS/ISIL) terrorists, the ministry said in a statement.

Facing
no resistance of the ISIS militants, the SDF units are advancing
along the left shore of the Euphrates towards Deir ez-Zor,” the
statement reads.

The
newly released images “clearly show that US special ops are
stationed at the outposts previously set up by ISIS militants.”

Despite
that the US strongholds being located in the ISIS areas, no screening
patrol has been organized at them,” the Russian Ministry of Defense
said.

This
map marks the currently relevant conflict area – (U.S. proxies –
yellow, SAA – red, ISIS – black):

Map
by 
Weekend
Warrior
 – bigger

The
accusations are plausible. Large parts of ISIS in Deir Ezzor consist
of local tribal forces from eastern-Syria. U.S. special envoy Brett
McGurk recently met tribal leaders who had earlier pledged allegiance
to ISIS. Deals were made. As we 
wrote:

The
U.S. diplomat tasked with the job, Brett McGurk**
recently
met
 with
local tribal dignitaries of the area. Pictures of the meeting were
published. Several people 
pointed
out
 that
the very same dignitaries were earlier pictured swearing allegiance
to the Islamic State.

bigger

Just
like during the “Anbar Awaking” in its war on Iraq the U.S.
is bribing the local radicals to temporarily change over to its side.
This will help the U.S. to claim that it defeated ISIS. But as soon
as the payments stop the very same forces will revert back to their
old game.

The
local criminal 
Ahmad
Abu Khawla
,
who had earlier fought for ISIS, was suddenly installed
as 
commander of
a newly invented “Deir Ezzor Military Council”, set up
under U.S. special force control.

Last
night a Russian three-star general and two colonels were 
killed in
a mortar attack while they visited a Syrian army headquarter in Deir
Ezzor:

Lieutenant-General
Valery Asapov, of the Russian armed forces, has been killed after
coming under shelling from Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL)
militants near Deir ez-Zor, the Russian Defense Ministry has
announced.

In
its statement, the ministry said that Asapov was at a command outpost
manned by Syrian troops, assisting commanders in the liberation of
the city of Deir ez-Zor.

Lieutenant-General Valery
Asapov is the highest-ranking Russian officer to be killed in the
Syrian campaign. He was a commander of the 5th Army in Russia’s
Eastern Military District, one of the four strategic commands in the
Russian Armed Forces. The army is based in Russia’s Far East, in
the city of Ussuriysk, some 98 km (61 miles) from Vladivostok.

For
three years ISIS had besieged Syrian troops in Deir Ezzor city and
its airport. It had not once managed to successfully attack the
Syrian headquarter or to kill high ranking officers. Now, as U.S.
proxy forces “advised” by U.S. special forces, have taken
position north of Deir Ezzor, “ISIS” suddenly has the
intelligence data and precision mortar capabilities to kill a bunch
of visiting Russian officers?

That
is not plausible. No one in Damascus, Baghdad, Tehran or Moscow will
believe that.

The
Russian military, as usual, reacts calmly and officially attributes
the attack to ISIS. Doing so avoids pressure to immediately react to
the attack. (The U.S. will falsely interpret this as a face-saving
Russian retreat.) 

But
no one in Moscow will believe that the incident is independent of
other recent maneuvers by the U.S. forces and independent of the
earlier accusations the Russian military made against the U.S.
forces.

Nominally
the U.S. and Russia are both in Syria to fight the Islamic State. The
Russian troops are legitimately there, having been invited by the
Syrian government. The U.S. forces have no legal justification for
their presence. So far open hostilities between the two sides had
been avoided. But as the U.S. now obviously sets out to split Syria
apart, openly cooperates with terrorists and does not even refrain
from killing Russian officers, the gloves will have to come off.

U.S.
Central Command has declared war on the Russian contingent in Syria.
A high ranking Russian general was killed. This inevitably requires a
reaction. The response does not necessarily have to come from Russian
forces.  Moscow has many capable allies in the area. The
response does not necessarily have to come in Syria.

“Accidents”
and “incidents”, like an “ISIS mortar attacks”,
or unintentional bombing of troop concentration of the other side,
can happen on both sides of the front. Cars can blow up, bridges can
collapse. Any U.S. officer or civilian official in the larger Middle
East should be aware that they too are now targets.

This
article was first published by 
Moon
Of Alabama
 –

See
also –

Death
of Russian general in Syria is result of US hypocrisy – Moscow
 :
Moscow is concerned that while Washington claims it is interested in
fighting Islamic State (IS, formerly ISISISIL) terrorists, it
demonstrates quite the opposite.

Satellite
images reveal US forces operating freely in ISIS areas

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

*  Eerder haalde de VS ‘Al Qaida Syrië’ van de zwarte terreurlijst…….



** Dezelfde schoft Brett McGurk die eerder Rusland durfde te beschuldigen van samenwerking met IS…. Zie: ‘Westerse bemoeienis met Syrië en de anti-Russische propaganda leugens (in de media)………

Zie ook: ‘CIA erkent dat Israël samen met Saoedi-Arabië ‘vecht tegen terreur’, die ze NB zelf hebben georganiseerd……..

        en: ‘Al Qaida de bondgenoot van de VS in de strijd tegen…… terrorisme! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘ (intussen heeft de VS ‘Al Qaida Syrië’ van de zwarte lijst met terreurorganisaties gehaald!!)

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

      en: ‘Van Baalen (VVD EU topgraaier) het is moeilijk te zien wie je moet steunen: Al Qaida, Al Qaida of Al Qaida……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

      en: ‘CIA valt nogmaals door de mand als wapenleverancier van IS…….

Regering May bezuinigt gehandicapten de dood in……. De BBC verzwijgt e.e.a. willens en wetens…….

TheCanary bracht op 16 september jl. een artikel waarin stuitend bewijs wordt geleverd over de BBC, die de Britse regering uit de ‘VN-wind’ houdt.

De VN heeft een rapport uitgebracht, waarin de bezuinigingen op het budget voor minder valide mensen, door de inhumane neoliberale regering May aan de paal wordt genageld. Volgens het rapport zijn deze bezuinigingen levensbedreigend en leiden tot moord, suïcide en euthanasie……*

De regering May insinueert met haar uitlatingen t.a.v. deze groep zwakkere mensen, dat het parasieten en uitnemers van de sociale zekerheid zijn, ze zouden leven op het belastinggeld van anderen…………………. 

Op 14 september jl. publiceerde de VN een audiobestand van de persconferentie over deze zaak, waarin het ook een volledig BBC interview overnam van 10 minuten, een interview met Theresia Degener, voorzitter van de VN commissie voor mensen met een handicap (UNCRPD).

‘Vreemd genoeg’ zond de BBC maar 20 seconden uit van dit interview…… U had het al begrepen: totaal niet vreemd, daar staatsomroep BBC vooral het regeringsbeleid verdedigt, hoe fout dat beleid ook is

Lees de uitstekende analyse van Steve Topple over deze ongelofelijke zaak (bij mijn noot (*) onder dat artikel nog een kleine aanvulling over het Nederlandse beleid op hetzelfde gebied, dat zoals u wellicht weet, weinig beter is (terwijl de reguliere pers hier, Rutte 2 de hemel in prijst..)……

The
BBC didn’t want you to hear the UN’s most damning interview about
the UK government in full. So here it is 

SEPTEMBER
15TH, 2017
  STEVE
TOPPLE

BBC interview,
of which only 20 seconds out of more than 10 minutes were 
broadcast,
has come to light. And it has exposed the UN’s most scathing attack
on the Conservative government to date.

Published by
the UN, it reveals the organisation thinks that austerity is “life
threatening” to many disabled people in the UK. And it sees the
government’s actions potentially leading to “killings and
euthanasia”, because it has helped create a society where a whole
group of people are viewed as “parasites”. But it’s an
interview the 
BBC completely
dumbed down for its viewers.

A
‘human catastrophe’

In
August, the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(UNCRPD) met in Geneva, Switzerland. It was assessing if the UK
government meets its obligations under the UN Convention on the
Rights of Disabled People.

And
it was 
publicly unequivocal
in its opinion on how disabled people are treated by the Conservative
government. Its Chair, Theresia Degener, said in a statement
seen by 
The
Canary
:

“Evidence
before us… reveals that [welfare] cut policies [have] led to human
catastrophe in your country, totally neglecting the vulnerable
situation people with disabilities find themselves in”.

But
on 14 September, the UN published the 
audio of
the committee’s concluding press conference. And it left in a
full 
BBC interview with
Degener. John Pring at 
Disability
News Service
 (DNS)
discovered the audio; you can read his full analysis 
here and
listen to the full audio 
here.

Disabled people: ‘parasites’ who could be ‘killed’

In the BBC interview, one of the UN’s most scathing comments was about public attitudes towards disabled people. Degener said [20.43] that the government and the media “have some responsibility” for society seeing [20.12] disabled people as “parasites, living on social benefits… and [living on] the taxes of other people”. And she said [20.23] these “very, very dangerous” attitudes could [20.52] “lead to violence… and if not, to killings and euthanasia”. And she urged [21.10] the government to “stop” this (audio):

Overarching
concerns

You
can read 
The
Canary
‘s
full analysis of the UNCRPD report 
here.
Broadly, it only noted 
two areas
which it considered “positive” in the Tory government’s
approach to disabled people. But it highlighted nearly 70 criticisms
over the Conservative government’s treatment of disabled people.
And it made over 90 recommendations to the government. It was
these concerns and recommendations that Degener referenced in
her 
BBC interview.

Degener said
[11.40]
 that
rights for disabled people in the UK were “going backwards”.
She 
said
[12.14]
 that
the Tories have implemented:

“a
policy of austerity… which discriminates against disabled people by
taking away benefits which were supposed to help disabled people to
live an independent life… [one] equal to others…”

Human
rights breaches

She
went on to explain how the UN believed successive Conservative-led
governments had breached “human rights laws” (audio):

Degener
continued by 
saying
[14.45]
 that
the UN believes that austerity has left disabled people reliant on
“voluntary” support; that disabled people cannot “participate
in culture and public life”; that schools are excluding disabled
children, leaving parents without “any support”. And she 
said
[15.55]
 the
loss of the Independent Living Fund (ILF) had led to disabled people
being “homeless”, “desperate”, and suffering mental health
issues. But she also 
noted
[16.34]
 “terrible”
reports of people taking their own lives “because of the cuts”.

The
UK government: ‘threatening’ disabled people’s lives

The BBC asked
[16.46]
 Degener
why the UN gave “the longest list of conclusions and
recommendations” it has ever given to a country. She 
said
[17.05]
 it
was because her committee had “set the bar very high”. But
she 
noted
[17.10]
 that,
while the UK “claims to be a world leader when it comes to
disability rights”, it is actually going backwards; and that this
“worries” the UN “a lot”. She then 
said
[18.25]
 government
policies had become “life threatening to many disabled people” (audio):

Overall,
the committee 
condemned the
UK’s attempts to misrepresent the impact of policies through
“unanswered questions”, “misused statistics”, and a “smoke
screen of statements”. It also said the government had introduced
policies and legislation which “fail to implement” disabled
people’s rights in “reality”.

The BBC response?

The BBC journalist told
[14.17]
 Deneger
that she can “edit” the interview. And edit it the 
BBC did,
as the only section 
broadcast was
20 seconds, containing some of Degener’s least contentious
comments. So 
The
Canary
 asked
the 
BBC why
it chose to edit the interview so heavily; only including a tiny
section of Degener’s responses.

BBC spokesperson
told 
The
Canary
:

“This
is misleading. We make editorial decisions about what is newsworthy
for inclusion in our coverage every day which often means using only
key parts of interviews. On the News at Six and Ten and radio
bulletins we very clearly reported on the UN report and its
criticisms of the UK’s record on protecting the rights of disabled
people, its concerns about the number of disabled living in poverty
and the effects of cuts to benefits – including relevant sections
of an interview with Theresa Degener”.

The
government’s response?

A
government spokesperson 
told DNS:

“We’re
disappointed that this report does not accurately reflect the
evidence we gave to the UN, and fails to recognise all the progress
we’ve made to empower disabled people in all aspects of their
lives. We spend over £50bn a year to support disabled people and
those with health conditions – more than ever before, and the
second highest in the G7. We’re committed to furthering rights and
opportunities for all disabled people, which is why it is encouraging
that almost 600,000 disabled people have moved into work in the UK
over the last four years.”

“We’re
also a recognised world leader in disability rights and equality,
which is why we supported the development of the UN convention”.

The
UK government and the media must take responsibility


The
UN has now 
reported four times in
the space of a year on human rights violations by the
Conservative-led government. As one disabled activist told 
The
Canary
:

“If
this was happening in a Middle Eastern country, the US would probably
have invaded by now, under the guise of ‘humanitarian’ grounds”.


But
the government’s response to all these reports? To simply shrug
their shoulders and say they didn’t believe them. And now, we see
the 
BBC cherry-picking
the most palatable parts of an interview with the UN to broadcast.
There is no discernible reason why the 
BBC could
not have published the interview in full on its website. But as the
UN implied, the 
BBC and
the rest of the media must take some responsibility for disabled
people’s appalling situation. The full responsibility, however,
lies directly at the Conservative government’s door.

This
article was updated at 5.10pm on Friday 15 September to reflect a
statement from the BBC.

Hier de link naar het originele artikel.

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



* Nu nog een VN rapport, waarin de Nederlandse bezuinigingen op het budget voor invaliden, chronisch zieken, ouderen en de GGZ zorg aan de kaak worden gesteld……… Intussen kan hier als bewezen worden geacht, dat deze bezuinigingen al tot een fiks aantal suïcides hebben geleid…… Met dank aan hare VVD kwaadaardigheid Schippers en PvdA opperschoft Martin ‘die vrouw’ van Rijn……. (en ja, de zorg over de schutting van de lokale politiek gooien, is een hele smerige manier van bezuinigen, die zoals gezegd veel mensen in diepe ellende heeft gestort……..

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

Het is 70 jaar gelden dat de CIA met ‘haar heilzame werk’ begon. 70 jaar waarin de CIA:

  • staatsgrepen pleegde, o.a. tegen Iran (destijds Perzië), Congo, Chili en Brazilië. 
  • ‘false flag’ operaties leidde, operaties zogenaamd uitgevoerd door vijanden van de VS, zodat de VS ‘acties’ tegen haar onwelgevallige, veelal democratisch gekozen regimes kon beginnen……. (niet zelden door het voeren van illegale oorlogen)
  • honderden (wellicht nog veel meer) verdachten martelde (en martelt), dit vooral in het buitenland en buitenlandse regimes (veelal niet democratisch gekozen) leerde ‘hoe het best kan worden gemarteld……. 
  • drugsoperaties leidde, zodat men met de opbrengsten geheime missies in het buitenland kon bekostigen……..
  • oud-nazi’s uit de gevangenis houden en hen zelfs naar de VS te brengen om daar hun werk voort te zetten. Voorts leidde de CIA een netwerk van 600 ex-nazi agenten in het door de Sovjet-Unie bezette deel van Duitsland, De dagelijkse leiding van deze nazi’s was in handen van Reinhard Gehlen, voormalig hoofd van de nazi-inlichtingendienst voor de Sovjet-Unie……

Er zijn nog veel meer zaken te noemen, waarvoor ik naar het onderstaande artikel van Anti-Media wil verwijzen

Happy
Birthday CIA: 7 Truly Terrible Things the Agency Has Done in 70 Years

September
18, 2017 at 5:26 pm

Written
by 
Carey
Wedler

(ANTIMEDIA) —
On
Monday, President Trump 
tweeted birthday
wishes to the Air Force and the CIA. Both
became 
official organizations
70 years ago on September 18, 1947, with the implementation of the
National Security Act of 1947.

After
spending years as a wartime intelligence agency called the Office of
Strategic Services, the agency was solidified as a key player in the
federal government’s operations with then-President Harry Truman’s
authorization.

In
the seventy years since, the CIA has committed a wide variety of
misdeeds, crimes, coups, and violence. Here are seven of the worst
programs they’ve carried out (that are known to the public):

    1.
    Toppling governments around the world
     —
    The CIA is best known for its first coup, Operation Ajax, in 1953,
    in which it ousted the democratically elected leader of Iran,
    Mohammed Mossadegh, reinstating the autocratic Shah, who favored
    western oil interests. That operation, which the CIA now 
    admits to
    waging with British intelligence, ultimately resulted in the 
    1979
    revolution
     and
    subsequent U.S. hostage crisis. Relations between the U.S. and Iran
    remain strained to this day, aptly described by the CIA-coined term
    blowback.”

But
the CIA has had a hand in 
toppling a
number of other democratically elected governments, from Guatemala
(1954) and the Congo (1960) to the Dominican Republic (1961), South
Vietnam (1963), Brazil (1964), and Chile (1973). The CIA has aimed to
install leaders who appease American interests,
often 
empowering oppressive, violent
dictators
.
This is only a partial list of countries where the CIA covertly
attempted to exploit and manipulate sovereign nations’ governments.

  1. Operation
    Paperclip 

    In one of the more bizarre CIA plots, the agency and other
    government departments employed Nazi scientists both within and
    outside the United States to gain an advantage over the
    Soviets. As 
    summarized by NPR:

The
aim [of Operation Paperclip] was to find and preserve German weapons,
including biological and chemical agents, but American scientific
intelligence officers quickly realized the weapons themselves were
not enough.

They
decided the United States needed to bring the Nazi scientists
themselves to the U.S. Thus began a mission to recruit top Nazi
doctors, physicists and chemists — including Wernher von Braun, who
went on to design the rockets that took man to the moon.

They
kept this plot secret, though they 
admitted to
it upon the release of 
Operation
Paperclip: The Secret Intelligence Program That Brought Nazi
Scientists To America
 by
Annie Jacobsen. In a book review, the CIA wrote that “
Henry
Wallace, former vice president and secretary of commerce, believed
the scientists’ ideas could launch new civilian industries and
produce jobs.” 

They
praised the book’s historical accuracy, noting “that the
Launch Operations Center at Cape Canaveral, Florida, was headed by
Kurt Debus, an ardent Nazi
.” They acknowledged that “General
Reinhard Gehlen, former head of Nazi intelligence operations against
the Soviets, was hired by the US Army and later by the CIA to operate
600 ex-Nazi agents in the Soviet zone of occupied Germany
.”

Remarkably,
they noted that Jacobsen “understandably questions the morality
of the decision to hire Nazi SS scientists,
” but praise her for
pointing out that it was done to fight Soviets. They also made sure
to add that the Soviets hired Nazis, too, apparently justifying their
own questionable actions by citing their most loathed enemy.

  1. Operation
    CHAOS
     —
    The FBI is widely known for its 
    COINTELPRO schemes
    to undermine 
    communist
    movements in the 1950s and anti-war, civil rights
    ,
    and 
    black
    power
     movements
    in the 1960s, but the CIA has not been implicated nearly as deeply
    because, technically, the CIA cannot legally engage in domestic
    spying. But that was of little concern to President Lyndon B.
    Johnson as opposition to the Vietnam war grew. According to
    former 
    New
    York Times
     journalist
    and Pulitzer Prize-winner Tim Weiner, as documented in his extensive
    CIA 
    historyLegacy
    of Ashes
    ,
    Johnson instructed then-CIA Director Richard Helms to break the law:

In
October 1967, a handful of CIA analysts joined in the first big
Washington march against the war. The president regarded protesters
as enemies of the state. He was convinced that the peace movement was
controlled and financed by Moscow and Beijing. He wanted proof. He
ordered Richard Helms to produce it.

Helms
reminded the president that the CIA was barred from spying on
Americans. He says Johnson told him: ‘I’m quite aware of that.
What I want for you is to pursue this matter, and to do what is
necessary to track down the foreign communists who are behind this
intolerable interference in our domestic affairs…’

Helms
obeyed. Weiner wrote:

In
a blatant violation of his powers under the law, the director of
central intelligence became a part-time secret police chief. The CIA
undertook a domestic surveillance operation, code-named Chaos. It
went on for almost seven years… Eleven CIA officers grew long hair,
learned the jargon of the New Left, and went off to infiltrate peace
groups in the United States and Europe
.”

According
to Weiner, “the agency compiled a computer index of 300,000
names of American people and organizations, and extensive files on
7,200 citizens. It began working in secret with police departments
all over America
.” Because they could not draw a “clear
distinction” between the new far left and mainstream opposition to
the war, the CIA spied on every major peace organization in the
country. President Johnson also wanted them to prove a connection
between foreign communists and the black power movement. “The
agency tried its best
,” Weiner noted, ultimately noting that
the CIA never found a shred of evidence that linked the leaders
of the American left or the black-power movement to foreign
governments.

  1. Infiltrating
    the media
     — Over the years, the CIA has successfully
    gained influence in the news media, as well as popular media like
    film and television. Its influence over the news began almost
    immediately after the agency was formed. As Weiner explained, CIA
    Director Allen Dulles established firm ties with newspapers:

Dulles
kept in close touch with the men who ran the New York Times, The
Washington Post, and the nation’s leading weekly magazines. He
could pick up the phone and edit a breaking story, make sure an
irritating foreign correspondent was yanked from the field, or hire
the services of men such as Time’s Berlin bureau chief and
Newsweek’s man in Tokyo
.”

He
continued:

It
was second nature for Dulles to plant stories in the press. American
newsrooms were dominated by veterans of the government’s wartime
propaganda branch, the Office of War Information…The men who
responded to the CIA’s call included Henry Luce and his editors at
Time, Life, and Fortune; popular magazines such as Parade, the
Saturday Review, and Reader’s Digest; and the most powerful
executives at CBS News. Dulles built a public-relations and
propaganda machine that came to include more than fifty news
organizations, a dozen publishing houses, and personal pledges of
support from men such as Axel Springer, West Germany’s most
powerful press baron
.”

The
CIA’s influence had not waned by 1977 when journalist Carl
Bernstein 
reported on
publications with CIA agents in their employ, as well as “
more
than 400 American journalists who in the past twenty five years
have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence
Agency.”

The
CIA has also successfully 
advised
on and influenced
 numerous
television shows, 
such
as
 Homeland and 24 and films like Zero
Dark Thirty 
and Argo,
which push narratives that ultimately favor the agency. According to
Tricia Jenkins, author of 
The
CIA in Hollywood: How the Agency Shapes Film & Television
a
concerted agency effort began in the 1990s to counteract negative
public perceptions of the CIA, but their influence reaches back
decades. In the 1950s, filmmakers produced films 
for the
CIA
,
including the 1954 film adaptation of George Orwell’s 
Animal
Farm
.

Researchers
Tom Secker and Matthew Alford, whose work has been 
published in
the 
American
Journal of Economics and Sociology
,
say their recent Freedom of Information Act requests have shown that
the CIA — along with the military — have 
influenced over
1,800 films and television shows, many of which have nothing to do
with CIA or military themes.

  1. Drug-induced
    Mind control
     –
    In the 1950s, the CIA began experimenting with drugs to determine
    whether they might be useful in extracting information.
    As 
    Smithsonian
    Magazine
     has noted of
    the MKUltra project:

The
project, which continued for more than a decade, was originally
intended to make sure the United States government kept up with
presumed Soviet advances in mind-control technology. It ballooned in
scope and its ultimate result, among other things, was illegal drug
testing on thousands of Americans
.”

Further:

The
intent of the project was to study ‘the use of biological and
chemical materials in altering human behavior,’ 
according
to
 the
official testimony of CIA director Stansfield Turner in 1977. The
project was conducted in extreme secrecy, Turner said, because of
ethical and legal questions surrounding the program and the negative
public response that the CIA anticipated if MKUltra should become
public.

Under
MKUltra, the CIA gave itself the authority to research how drugs
could:’ ‘promote the intoxicating effects of alcohol;’ ‘render
the induction of hypnosis easier;’ ‘enhance the ability of
individuals to withstand privation, torture and coercion;’ produce
amnesia, shock and confusion; and much more. Many of these questions
were investigated using unwitting test subjects, like drug-addicted
prisoners, marginalized sex workers and terminal cancer patients–
‘people who could not fight back,’ 
in
the words of
 Sidney
Gottlieb, the chemist who introduced LSD to the CIA.

Further,
as Weiner noted:

Under
its auspices, seven prisoners at a federal penitentiary in Kentucky
were kept high on LSD for seventy-seven consecutive days. When the
CIA slipped the same drug to an army civilian employee, Frank Olson,
he leaped out of the window of a New York Hotel.”

Weiner
added that senior CIA officers destroyed “almost all of the
records” of the programs, but that while the “evidence that
remains is fragmentary…it strongly suggests that use of secret
prisons for the forcible drug-induced questioning of suspect agents
went on throughout the 1950s.

Years
later, the CIA would be accused of distributing crack-cocaine into
poor black communities, though this is currently less substantiated
and 
supported mostly
by accounts of those who claim to have been involved.

  1. Brutal
    torture tactics
     —
    More recently, the CIA was 
    exposed for
    sponsoring abusive, disturbing terror tactics against detainees at
    prisons housing terror suspects. An extensive 2014 Senate report
    documented agents committing sexual abuse, forcing detainees to
    stand on broken legs, waterboarding them so severely it sometimes
    led to convulsions, and imposing forced rectal feeding, to name a
    few examples. Ultimately, the agency had very little actionable
    intelligence to show for their torture tactics but 
    lied to
    suggest they did, according to the torture report. Their torture
    tactics 
    led the
    International Criminal Court to suggest the CIA, along with the U.S.
    armed forces, could be guilty of war crimes for their abuses.

    7.
    Arming radicals — The CIA has a long habit of arming
    radical, extremist groups that view the United States as enemies. In
    1979, the CIA set out to support Afghan rebels in their bid to
    defeat the Soviet occupation of the Middle Eastern country. As
    Weiner wrote, in 1979, “Prompted by Zbigniew Brzezinski,
    President Carter signed a covert-action order for the CIA to provide
    the Afghan rebels with medical aid, money, and propaganda.

As
Weiner detailed later in his book:

The
Pakistani intelligence chiefs who doled out the CIA’s guns and
money favored the Afghan factions who proved themselves most capable
in battle. Those factions also happened to be the most committed
Islamists. No one dreamed that the holy warriors could ever turn
their jihad against the United States
.”

Though
some speculate the CIA directly armed Osama bin Laden, that is yet to
be fully proven or admitted. What is clear is that western
media 
revered him
as a valuable fighter against the Soviets, that he 
arrived to
fight in Afghanistan in1980, and that al-Qaeda emerged from the
mujahideen, who were beneficiaries of the CIA’s program. Stanford
University has 
noted that Bin
Laden and Abdullah Azzam, a prominent Palestinian cleric,
established
Al Qaeda from the fighters, financial resources, and training and
recruiting structures left over from the anti-Soviet war
.”
Much of those “structures” were provided by the agency.
Intentionally or not, the CIA helped fuel the rise of the terror
group.

Weiner
noted that as the CIA failed in other countries like Libya, by the
late 1980s “Only the mujahideen, the Afghan holy warriors, were
drawing blood and scenting victory. The CIA’s Afghan operation was
now a $700-million-dollar-a-year-program
” and represented 80%
of the overseas budget of the clandestine services. “The CIA’s
briefing books never answered the question of what would happen when
a militant Islamic army defeated the godless invaders of
Afghanistan
,” though Tom Twetten, “the number two man in
the clandestine service in the summer of 1988
,” was tasked with
figuring out what would happen with the Afghan rebels. “We don’t
have any plan
,” he concluded.

Apparently
failing to learn their lesson, the CIA adopted nearly the exact same
policy in Syria decades later, arming what they called “moderate
rebels” against the Assad regime. Those groups
ultimately 
aligned with
al-Qaeda groups. One CIA-backed faction made headlines last year
for 
beheading a
child (though President Trump cut off the CIA program in June, the
military 
continues to
align with “moderate” groups).

Unsurprisingly,
this list is far from complete. The CIA has engaged in a wide variety
of 
extrajudicial
practice
,
and there are likely countless transgressions we have yet to learn
about.

As
Donald Trump cheers the birthday of an agency he himself
once 
criticized,
it should be abundantly clear that the nation’s covert spy agency
deserves scrutiny and skepticism — not celebration.

Creative
Commons
 / Anti-Media / Report
a typo

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

Moet u nagaan, dan durft men nog te spreken over ‘fake news’ en een land als Rusland de schuld voor veel internet ellende te geven en te beschuldigen van agressief gedrag………….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Zie ook: ‘CIA en 70 jaar desinformatie in Europese opiniebladen…………

        en: ‘VS vermoordde meer dan 20 miljoen mensen sinds het einde van WOII……..

        en: ‘CIA erkent dat Israël samen met Saoedi-Arabië ‘vecht tegen terreur’, die ze NB zelf hebben georganiseerd……..

        en: ‘VS centraal commando werkt in Syrië samen met IS en verklaarde Rusland de oorlog………

        en: ‘Al Qaida de bondgenoot van de VS in de strijd tegen…… terrorisme! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!‘ (intussen heeft de VS ‘Al Qaida Syrië’ van de zwarte lijst met terreurorganisaties gehaald!!)

       en: ‘CIA valt nogmaals door de mand als wapenleverancier van IS…….

      en: ‘Van Baalen (VVD EU topgraaier) het is moeilijk te zien wie je moet steunen: Al Qaida, Al Qaida of Al Qaida……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

      en: ‘Massamedia VS vergeven van CIA ‘veteranen’, alsof die media nog niet genoeg ‘fake news’ ofwel leugens brengen……..