In de VS (en daarbuiten) spreken de reguliere mediaorganen hosanna over de aanstelling van sjoemelaar en oplichter Mueller, de ex-FBI chef, als hoofdonderzoeker naar ‘de Trump – Rusland connectie’.
Dezelfde Mueller deed onderzoek naar de antrax aanvallen in de VS na de 911 terreuraanvallen in 2001. Hoewel hij niet verantwoordelijk was, voor de bewering, dat het Irak van Saddam Hoessein achter die antrax aanvallen zat, heeft hij de 6 jaar daarna flink z’n best gedaan om zoveel mogelijk te verdoezelen, de zaak te vertroebelen voor het volk en de zaak zolang mogelijk te rekken….. Immers de VS besloot mede op basis van die antrax aanvallen en de massavernietigingswapens door/van Irak, dat land aan te vallen…….. Overigens bleek na onderzoek, dat de gebruikte antrax uit een legerlaboratorium van de VS kwam…….
Gisteren bracht Anti-Media een artikel over deze zaak, een artikel dat eerder op MintPress News verscheen, geschreven door Robbie Martin. Hij concludeert dat er grote overeenkomsten zijn, met de eerdere aanklachten tegen Saddam Hoessein en die nu tegen Rusland worden gebruikt.
Mensen, je weet niet wat je leest en ik zelf kan (alweer) maar één conclusie trekken: de VS wordt geregeerd door een stel psychopathische gekken, waar de echte macht voor een groot deel niet eens bij de regering ligt, maar bij de ‘Deep-State’*
Anthrax
And “Russiagate”: Mueller’s Special Counsel Appointment Should
Raise Concern
(MPN) Amidst
the overwhelming bipartisan
praise given to former FBI Director Robert Mueller for
his appointment as special counsel in the Trump-Russia investigation,
few media outlets have voiced concern over his credentials.
Mueller’s unforgivably
poor performance during
an investigation into the 2001 anthrax scare should give pause to
those who hope to find out the truth about Russia’s alleged
involvement in U.S. politics.
In
October 2001 – less than a month after the 9/11 terror attacks –
weaponized anthrax spores were
sent through the U.S. mail system to
prominent politicians and journalists. The anthrax attacks generated
hysteria and panic, as well as created the perception that terrorism
was going to remain a major threat, with 9/11 representing just the
first wave.
The
anthrax attacks also provided the George W. Bush administration with
the opportunity to create a three-way connection in the public
consciousness between the 9/11 attacks, the anthrax attacks, and
Saddam Hussein. The “WMD lies” that would lead the U.S. into war
in Iraq were hatched from one initial lie: that the anthrax mailings
had fingerprints that could be traced
back to the
Iraqi government’s biological weapons program and that they
represented a second wave of terrorism.
Major
players in the U.S. government made
strong efforts to link the anthrax attacks to the Iraqi government –
efforts that Mueller played no part in. But in the following six
years, Mueller did participate in a public disinformation campaign
that muddied the waters regarding the 2001 anthrax attacks.
He
and his bureau were in a position to unravel the underlying rationale
for mounting an illegal invasion that left over a million Iraqi
civilians dead. Instead, they worked to bury that rationale and stoke
fears that would help to prop up public support for the invasion.
Looking back at the way in which the case was handled, it is clear
that Mueller may not be the most suitable candidate for heading the
ongoing investigation into “Russiagate.”
Flimsy
evidence and false accusations
As
early as Nov. 9, 2001 – less than one month after the anthrax
attacks began – the FBI had identified
anthrax in the letters as being of the “Ames strain,” a
strain of anthrax that was isolated by U.S. researchers in 1981. Due
to its domestic origins, the FBI concluded that the attacks were
likely perpetrated by someone working within the U.S. and not by a
foreign actor.
Despite
having this knowledge, the Bush administration sent then-Secretary of
State Colin Powell to the UN with
a prop vial of anthrax in
order to obtain support for the Iraq War. Mueller could’ve turned
the course of events at the time by making sure the press was aware
that the most likely culprit was inside the U.S., but instead chose
not to interfere with Bush’s neoconservative agenda. Powell’s
presentation of “evidence” of Iraq’s alleged possession of
chemical and biological weapons formed a major part of the U.S.
effort to build a case for war in Iraq – although the country’s
possession of these weapons would eventually prove to be a falsehood.
In
another pivotal moment in the case, Mueller privately briefed Senator
Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and former Senator Tom Daschle – both of
whom were targeted with anthrax letters – regarding the FBI’s
prime suspect, a retired
bioweapons scientist named Steven Hatfil.
Mueller’s
best evidence came from bloodhounds, who had evidently traced
the scent from the anthrax letters to Hatfil’s apartment.
What Mueller neglected to mention is that bloodhound scent evidence
is often
inaccurate and has even led to wrongful convictions.
But it was too late for Hatfil, as the press had already begun to
crucify him after the FBI came forward with its “evidence.” Some
agents even used the bloodhounds as props in press conferences that
could be better described as publicity stunts.
Hatfil’s
life was turned upside-down by the accusations. He was hounded by the
FBI and other authorities, facing deliberate
harassment tactics often referred to as “bumper locking.” He
tearfully denied the FBI’s accusations during two news conferences
held in August 2002, but by that time his life and career had already
been shredded to pieces due to his naming as a “person of interest”
in the investigation. Hatfil would later receive
a $4.6-million-dollar
settlement from the FBI in 2008 after
filing a lawsuit against the Bureau, but only after five years of
litigation and the destruction of his personal and professional
reputation.
But
Mueller and the FBI weren’t done yet. That same year, they ended
up pinning
the attacks on a man named Bruce Ivins,
a senior biodefense researcher at Maryland’s Fort Detrick military
installation. Their accusation would lead Ivins to commit
suicide by overdosing on
a combination of Tylenol and codeine, a method of suicide that some
thought to be an unlikely choice for someone with Ivins’ level of
biological expertise.
Even
after claiming to have solved the case, the FBI faced
skepticism regarding its conclusions.
Leahy spoke to Mueller at a three-hour public hearing, stating that
he did not believe that Ivins was the only culprit:
“I
believe there were others involved either before or after the fact
who were complicit…I believe there are others involved who could be
charged with murder.”
Leahy’s
Republican counterpart, former Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania,
also questioned the FBI’s findings:
“I’ve
looked over a good bit of the evidence on the anthrax case just to
contrast prosecutors’ opinions…and I have grave doubts about
sufficiency of evidence for proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
When
the FBI decided to give a press conference on the final conclusion of
their investigation, Mueller declined to attend, eating dinner at a
restaurant about a block away. He instead allowed two lower-ranking
investigators to sweat their way through the surprisingly adversarial
questions that were lobbed at them by attending journalists.
Video
of this press conference shows
an almost unanimously incredulous press pool, some even visibly angry
over the series of non-answers given to them by FBI officials. They
offered only one piece of physical evidence to the public: a flask
they said contained spores that they claimed Ivins used to grow a
colony of the “Ames strain” during his off-hours at Ft. Detrick.
But there was one major problem with their “smoking gun”
evidence.
The
National Academy of Sciences (NAS) was asked by the FBI to verify the
evidence but
concluded that
anthrax found in the flask could not be traced back to anthrax
contained in the letters. But instead of waiting for the NAS to
release these findings, Mueller allowed the FBI to pre-empt the NAS
with their own press conference. A 2011 report from the National
Research Council also
called the FBI’s findings into question.
Russiagate:
why the anthrax case matters
In
light of his poor handling of the anthrax case, one has to wonder:
why is the media now celebrating Mueller’s appointment as special
counsel for the Russia-Trump investigation? One doesn’t need to
look far to find multiple parallels between the false WMD claims made
by the Bush administration – which had their origins in the anthrax
scare – and the media’s current obsession with finding evidence
of Russian meddling in last year’s election. In both cases, the
media fixated on questionable evidence and the creation of an
artificial “bogeyman” to advance a deeper, more sinister agenda.
Both
the false WMD claims that led the U.S. into the Iraq War and the
ongoing Russia scaremongering campaign have relied on a vague
three-way connection between unrelated parties in order to shoehorn
in a larger national security and foreign policy scheme. Under Bush,
this was done by artificially connecting 9/11 to the anthrax attacks,
and then to Saddam Hussein, creating a climate of fear. That same
climate is being recreated now – only this time, the specter is
Russia.
Democrats
and their allies are using a similar psychological warfare campaign
to create a fictitious three-way connection between Trump, Russia and
WikiLeaks in the public consciousness during a time of emotional
trauma for Democratic voters. The larger theory posits that all three
parties were colluding with each other to take down Hillary Clinton —
even if no proof has been offered that Russia
was WikiLeaks’ source.
This
narrative has been bolstered by the use of weaponized mainstream
media terms like “fake news” and an increasingly prevalent
McCarthy-esque mindset among Clinton voters who are quick to accuse
their opponents of being Putin apologists. Even supporters of Bernie
Sanders, who was running on the Democratic ticket just as Clinton
was, have faced such accusations.
Americans
should not want a man who knew the Bush administration was trying to
create a fictional connection between Hussein, anthrax and 9/11 to
have the final verdict on another new three-way fiction: the
conspiratorial web being woven between WikiLeaks, Trump and Russia.
Robbie
Martin is a writer and documentary filmmaker behind “A
Very Heavy Agenda,
& American
Anthrax.
He also co-hosts Media Roots Radio with Abby Martin.
*Deep State: een samenwerkingsverband van de geheime diensten, politici die als lobbyist grote bedrijven dienen (waaronder oliemaatschappijen en de wapenindustrie), hoge invloedrijke ambtenaren (als Mueller), het militair-industrieel complex en de financiële maffia (banken e.d.), waar ik zelf nog de reguliere media aan toe zou willen voegen. Dit daar de reguliere VS mediaorganen in handen zijn van een kleine groep welgestelden, al dan niet in de vorm van grote aandeelhouders. (dat laatste gaat op voor de rest van de reguliere westerse media, ook die in Nederland)
Klik voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, op één van de labels, die u hieronder terug kan vinden.
Bloody Therasa May wil de aanslag in Manchester misbruiken om een grondoorlog in Syrië op poten te zetten, zogenaamd tegen IS, terwijl de Britse regering meermaals aandrong op een grondoorlog tegen de democratisch gekozen regering Assad……….. De laatste keer net een maand geleden, toen Boris Johnson aandrong op een oorlog ‘tegen Assad……’ Dit na de leugen, waarmee de regering Assad werd beschuldigd van een gifgasaanval tegen de bevolking van Khan Sheikhoun (het is overigens opvallend stil over die gifgasaanval…….).
Met de verkiezingen in het verschiet, is het parlement naar huis gestuurd en heeft de inhumane regering May de mogelijkheid een beroep te doen op de regel ‘Royal Prerogative’, het recht van de regering om vanwege terreurdreiging een oorlog (in Syrië) te beginnen……. Een eerdere poging in 2013 om grondtroepen in te zetten in Syrië tegen het Syrische bewind, strandde in het parlement…….. Moet u nagaan, de terrorist die de aanslag pleegde in Manchester heeft zelf ook tegen Assad gevochten…. Het is dat ‘t zo triest is, anders zou je je dood lachen………
Dan is er nog de wapendeal die May met één van de grootste terreurstaten in het Midden-Oosten sloot: Saoedi-Arabië, de grootste financier van IS…… De neoliberale ploert May durfde toen glashard te zeggen, dat deze wapendeal in het belang van Britse veiligheid was……. (alweer: het is dat ‘t zo triest is allemaal….)
Met het parlement uit de weg kan de regering misbruik maken van de ophef onder het volk en zo een illegale oorlog doordrukken. De media staan volledig achter May, dat bleek vanmiddag ook nog eens op BBC World Service radio. Rond 14.15 u. (CET) gaf men Jeremy Corbyn onder uit de zak, daar deze terecht opmerkte, dat een drastische verandering in de buitenlandpolitiek van Groot-Brittannië nodig is, dit daar deze desastreuze politiek o.a. de aanslag in Manchester heeft gecreëerd……… De verslaggever liet weten, dat men Corbyn deze schandelijke uitspraak zeer kwalijk neemt, ‘immers deze aanslag zou niets te maken hebben met de buitenlandpolitiek van GB….!!!!
Overigens heeft de regering May nu een andere lang gekoesterde wens voor elkaar: Britse militairen in de straten van GB…….. In 2015 maakte de Britse regering een geheim plan, genaamd ‘Operation Temperer’,met dit plan wordt het de regering toegestaan tot 5.000 gewapende militairen op straat in te zetten…… Voor de aanslag waren er al 1.000 militairen op de Britse straten te vinden…….
Gezien deze zaken, kan je stellen dat de regering May, ‘vreemd genoeg’, een enorm belang had bij de aanslag in Manchester……..* Met een oorlog in Syrië, zogenaamd als vergelding voor de aanslag, zal haar herverkiezing straks veilig gesteld zijn, waar die oorlog al lang door de Conservatieven (of: Tories) werd bepleit, dit naast bewapende militairen op de Britse straten……. En alweer was de dader van de aanslag in Manchester bekend bij de Britse geheime diensten en politie………**
Lullig genoeg gebruiken ook andere westerse regeringen, de in feite door henzelf geproduceerde terreur (vanwege militair ingrijpen in landen waar het westen niets te zoeken heeft), om militairen op de eigen bevolking in te zetten……. In het verleden heeft dit in diverse landen meermaals tot een militaire coup geleid…… Onze privacy ligt voor een groot deel al op het kerkhof, nu de rest van onze vrijheid nog…….. Ook in Nederland zijn de laatste jaren meermaals militaire oefeningen in de bewoonde omgeving gevoerd……. Intussen schijnt men in Duitsland een westerse stad te hebben gebouwd, waar NAVO troepen kunnen oefenen op het in bedwang houden van de westerse bevolking………
Hier het Anti-Media artikel dat o.a. ten grondslag ligt aan het hierboven gestelde:
Theresa
May Pushing For UK Intervention in Syria Following Manchester Attack
Theresa May Pushing For UK Intervention in Syria Following Manchester Attack
(MPN) Following
the recent Daesh (ISIS)-linked terror attack in Manchester, England,
United Kingdom Prime Minister Theresa May raised
the country’s terror threat levelto
critical, the first time it has been raised to that level since 2007.
However, the situation in the UK is dramatically different now than
it was when the streets of London and Glasgow airport were the
targets of foiled terrorist attacks in June 2007.
This
is partially thanks to a once-secret contingency plan established by
the UK government in 2015 known as “Operation Temperer.” The plan
allows for up to 5,000 British troops to be deployed on the streets
of their own country. Almost 1,000 soldiers have
already been deployed in
order to free up armed officers for counter-terrorism operations. As
was reported
in 2015,
the operation would involve sending troops to guard key targets in
major cities if Daesh or other terror groups launch multiple attacks
on UK soil.
While
the Manchester bombing seems to be an isolated incident thus far, May
and others in the British government have warned repeatedly
that another
terror attack is “imminent.”
But
the action being taken in the wake of the Manchester bombing is
unique for another reason that stretches far beyond the country’s
borders, as there is now an increased likelihood of the UK taking
military action abroad – particularly in Syria, where the UK and
its American ally have a mutual interest in pushing for regime
change.
With
the UK
Parliament dissolved until
after snap elections are held early next month, the executive branch
of the UK government – led by May – could use the “Royal
Prerogative”
to take the UK to war in Syria over a potential terrorist threat.
Indeed, it was parliament that blocked the UK government’s last
attempt to carry out military intervention in Syria in 2013. But with
the homeland now under threat from Daesh, May does
have the ability to
declare war were she and her cabinet to decide that it was necessary
to protect the safety of UK citizens.
Indeed,
members of May’s cabinet were already ratcheting up their push for
UK intervention in Syria less than a month ago. UK Foreign Secretary
Boris Johnson stated
in late April that
any requirement to obtain Parliament’s approval for Britain’s
involvement in military action in Syria “would have to be tested.”
Johnson
also stated that
“it would be very difficult for us to say no” to taking military
action against the Assad regime if they were asked to do so by the
U.S. In addition, Michael Fallon, the UK defense secretary, refused
to rule out “a nuclear first strike” against
another nation were the UK to be under “exceptional threat.”
Watch
Theresa May defend UK arms sales to Saudi Arabia, a top financier of
ISIS — claiming it makes Britain’s streets safer:Via deze link komt u op het originele artikel., waar een video van 54 seconden wordt afgespeeld, die onmiddellijk begint zodra u op op de pagina bent, zo niet even naar benden ‘ scrollen’. Op die pagina vindt u ook een Twitterbericht, dat ik niet kon kopiëren.
If
the “imminent” terror attack May has warned the UK about
materializes before elections are held on June 8 and before
parliament is reassembled, it would be much easier for the UK
government to convince a panicked populace of the need for a new war
abroad. Indeed, the suicide bomber in Manchester – though a
British-Libyan national – is said to
have “probably” traveled to
Syria.
British
media is also hyping the attack’s links to Syria, with The
Sun stating:
“Cowardly ISIS warlords – hiding in Syria – have claimed
responsibility for the gutless attack.”
For
May, taking military action in Syria would be beneficial by both
helping to ensure her electoral victory in June and fulfilling the
country’s goal of destabilizing Syria.
With
the Syrian government again making
major gains against
Daesh and Western-backed “moderate rebels,” the pro-intervention
governments of the West may finally be ready to push for a ground
invasion of Syria. The U.S. already has
thousands of troops active in Syria,
ostensibly for a potential assault on the Daesh stronghold of Raqqa –
which also seems
to be quickly approaching.
Russia, Syria’s strongest ally, also seems to be aware that things
are set to heat up soon, as they
have deployed their
own military personnel along the Syria-Jordan border.
Ongelofelijk maar waar: afgelopen week werd bekend gemaakt, dat Nederland niet een begrotingsoverschot van 3,5 miljard heeft over 2016, maar een begrotingstekort van 1 miljard euro!!
Weet u nog, het CBS bericht van 24 maart jl. (ruim voor de verkiezingen), waarin werd gesteld, dat 2016 een begrotingsoverschot heeft opgeleverd van 3,5 miljard…… Met andere woorden: het CBS gaf daarmee het kabinet Rutte 2 een 8…….
De regelmatige lezer van dit blog weet, dat ik het CBS zie als een propagandaorgaan voor de zittende regering, de cijfers pakken voor 90% goed uit voor de broodheer van het CBS, in dit geval Rutte 2.
Je zou kunnen stellen, dat deze valse claim de VVD en PvdA niet heeft geholpen hogere cijfers te behalen bij de verkiezingen, immers de PvdA werd bijna weggevaagd en de VVD verloor maar liefst 25% van haar zetels……. Echter je kan ook de vraag stellen, hoe ‘de slachting’ eruit had gezien, als het echte cijfer bekend was geweest……. Ofwel de kans dat de VVD met de verkiezingen niet de grootste partij was gebleven, zou levensgroot zijn geweest…….. Kortom het CBS heeft de verkiezingen gemanipuleerd!!
Overigens zal het niet bij één miljard blijven, daar de plaag van de Grieken, de zwaar over een hondendrol getilde PvdA zakkenwasser Dijsselbloem, na het bekend worden van de tegenvallers, de media toevoegde, dat er ‘waarschijnlijk nog een paar addertjes onder het gras zitten’. Ik zal dit even vertalen voor u: er liggen reuze pythons op het gras, pythons die je onmogelijk over het hoofd kan zien!!
Kortom, we zijn nogmaals bedonderd door het afbraakkabinet Rutte 2 in samenwerking met cijfergoochelinstituut CBS!!
In Nederland hebben we ‘de Russen’ (lees: CIA) in het geheel niet nodig voor het manipuleren van de verkiezingen! Aan nepnieuws hebben we overigens ook al decennia lang geen gebrek, gezien alle leugens in NRC, Volkskrant, Telegraaf en AD. Neem alleen al de berichtgeving in die kranten voorafgaand aan de illegale oorlogen tegen Afghanistan, Irak (ook nu wordt er amper bericht over de vele moorden die de VS begaat in Mosul), Libië en Syrië (waar ook nog eens zwaar wordt gelogen over de rol van het Syrische leger en de Russen….)………
Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.
Vanmorgen op Radio1, de correspondent voor Israël, Jan Franke, Deze sprak over de uitlatingen van de Israëlische minister van huisvesting, de oorlogshitser en psychopaat Galant, die stelde dat Assad vermoord moet worden, waarna Israël een aanval tegen Iran moet inzetten*.
De VS verspreidde eerder het gerucht, dat Syrië grote aantallen politieke gevangenen zou executeren, iets waar geen greintje bewijs voor werd gevonden. Franke herhaalde dit nepnieuws (of ‘fake news’) echter en voegde daar het laatste nepnieuws uit de VS aan toe, door te stellen, dat e.e.a. blijkt uit VS satellietfoto’s waarop een crematorium te zien zou zijn. U weet wel hetzelfde soort satellietfoto’s waarmee de VS 14 jaar geleden ‘wist te bewijzen’ dat Saddam Hoessein (Irak) massavernietigingswapens had en op basis waarvan dit ‘land’ een illegale oorlog tegen Irak begon, een oorlog die intussen aan meer dan 1,5 miljoen Irakezen het leven heeft gekost……..
Volgens Franke heeft de uitspraak van Galant van alles te maken met die ontdekking van de VS, dat er een crematorium naast een gevangenis in Syrië werd gebouwd, waar tegenstanders van de regering Assad na executie zouden worden gecremeerd…….. Zoals gezegd: Franke bracht e.e.a. op een manier, alsof het hier om feiten gaat en gezien de holocaust zou het niet vreemd zijn, dat Galant zijn uitspraken heeft gedaan, zo voegde Franke toe…….
Franke stelde al evenzeer als feit, dat Israël alleen doelen in Syrië aanvalt, die een directe bedreiging zou zijn voor Israël, dus het bombarderen van Iraanse wapenkonvooien richting Hamas in Libanon……. Ook voor die claim is totaal geen bewijs en wordt ontkend door zowel Syrië als Rusland, sterker nog deze stellen, dat moedwillig het Syrische leger als doelwit werd gebombardeerd, waar alleen terreurgroepen als Al Qaida (al-Nusra) en IS baat bij hebben…………..
Franke vertelde dat Israël stiekem Syriërs oplapt in Israëlische ziekenhuizen, waarna de genezen mensen weer over de Syrische grens worden gezet…… Het echte verhaal is, dat Israël veldhospitalen heeft op de door hen illegaal bezette Golanhoogten, waar terroristen van IS en Al Qaida worden opgelapt, zodat ze door kunnen met de strijd tegen Assad, een zaak die 2 jaar geleden al bekend werd gemaakt……. Bij ernstige verwondingen, kunnen deze terroristen vervoerd worden naar ziekenhuizen in Israël……
Israël heeft er dan ook alle baat bij, dat Syrië wordt opgedeeld en daarmee ‘geen gevaar’ meer is voor Israël, iets dat Franke uiteraard niet vertelde…….
Kortom een smerig gekleurd verhaal van Franke, dat niets, maar dan ook helemaal niets met onafhankelijke journalistiek te maken heeft!!
Hier een citaat van Franke uit een interview dat plaatsvond in 2012:
Welk
verhaal wil je tijdens je correspondentschap vertellen?
“Ik probeer heel bewust het journalistieke niche economie, technologie en innovatie in Israël in te vullen. Dit interesseert mij persoonlijk en er is een markt voor, omdat weinig journalisten hier over schrijven. Bovendien kan je goed bij de feiten blijven. Wetenschappelijke en economische ontwikkelingen zijn minder aan meningen onderhevig dan de politieke situatie hier. Toch vind ik niet dat je met een vooropgezette mening ‘jouw verhaal van het land’ moet willen vertellen. Omdat ik inmiddels ook voor onder andere ANP over algemene onderwerpen schrijf, ben ik mij hier sterk van bewust. Er zitten hier gelukkig uitstekende Nederlandse correspondenten. We drinken graag een biertje. Dan komt dit onderwerp altijd wel op tafel. Zo blijf ik scherp en open.”
ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Wat een oplichter die Franke, jezus!!
De Federal Communications Commission (FCC) heeft gisteren een eerste aanzet gedaan, tot het opheffen van net neutraliteit……
De FCC wil het mogelijk maken, dat er een internet met verschillende snelheden komt, waar de hoogste snelheid van dataoverdracht wordt voorbehouden aan welgestelden en bedrijven, die daar een fikse som voor moeten betalen…… Hiermee zal de macht van bedrijven en welgestelden op het internet vergroot worden en daarmee komt het internet direct in gevaar als vrij, open en democratisch medium!!
Gelukkig is het verzet groot in de VS en gisteren was er een groot protest, georganiseerd door ‘Free Press’, voor het kantoor van de FCC in Washington. Helaas zal dit politiek weinig invloed hebben, zeker gezien de zwakke steun voor het protest, alleen 13 democratische senatoren hebben zich openlijk uitgesproken tegen deze smerige greep op het in feite democratische internet.
U zult begrijpen, dat wanneer deze zaak wordt doorgevoerd in de VS, we binnen de kortste keren gedwongen zullen worden mee te doen in Europa. Dat zou in principe zelfs afgedwongen kunnen worden via het vermaledijde CETA verdrag met Canada, immers bedrijven zullen dan ook op het internet een machtsfactor van betekenis worden en zullen eisen, dat hen onwelgevallige boodschappen, sites en blogs worden geweerd……..
Kortom ook voor de EU en Europa in het groot geldt, dat we de straat op zullen moeten, om daar ons internet zoals we dit nu kennen, te beschermen tegen de grote kabelaars!! Als ik me niet vergis, doen de Nederlandse kabelaars al stiekem mee aan een internet op meerdere snelheden, gericht op verschillende groepen. Zo hoor je regelmatig reclames van kabelaars voor bedrijven, waar men snelheden belooft, die je als burger niet anders kan krijgen, dan door een fiks duurder abonnement…… Ach ja, in Nederland is de overheid al jaren bezig de klassenmaatschappij van zo’n 100 jaar geleden opnieuw op poten te zetten………
‘Fight
to Save the Internet’ Takes to Streets as FCC Votes on Net
Neutrality
‘Fight to Save the Internet’ Takes to Streets as FCC Votes on Net Neutrality
(COMMONDREAMS) As
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) prepares to vote Thursday
to
begin the process of repealing net neutrality regulations, the
grassroots resistance is rising up.
A
“Rally to Save the Internet,” organized by digital rights group
Free Press and including many other advocacy, online, and tech
groups, has hundreds of people demonstrating outside FCC headquarters
in Washington, D.C., for an open internet.
As Common
Dreamsreported,
FCC head Ajit Pai announced his plan to roll back net neutrality
rules last month, after he met with telecommunications
executives—earning accusations that Pai is acting as a “puppet”
for the industry.
Digital
rights activists and major tech firms alike have been mobilizing
against the plan, which would allow Internet Service Providers (ISPs)
to charge wealthier users for “fast lanes,” while other internet
users suffer through slower service.
“A
horrid idea at any time, this proposal is particularly destructive
now that so much of our democratic discourse plays out via the
internet,” said former FCC commissioner Michael Copps in
a statement.
“The Trump Administration’s anything goes approach to its
corporate benefactors will wreak havoc on citizens seeking truth,
facts, diversity, and privacy.”
And
while Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) spoke at the rally Thursday, there has
been a notable lack of resistance from many Democratic members of
Congress. Only 13 Democratic senators signed an open letter Wednesday
urging the FCC to preserve its open internet rules.
“By
proposing to take away the existing net neutrality protections,
President Trump’s FCC is threatening to take away your ability to
have free and open use of the internet. This proposal will have
profound impacts on the way all of us watch movies, listen to music,
do homework, talk to family, consult with a doctor, pay bills, and
conduct business. Taking away these rules benefits no one except
cable, telephone, and wireless broadband companies,” the letter
reads, according
to Tech
Crunch.
The
letter’s signatories include: Sens. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chuck
Schumer (D-N.Y.), Markey, Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Al Franken
(D-Minn.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.),
Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Chris Murphy
(D-Conn.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and Kamala
Harris (D-Calif.)
Follow
along with Thursday’s demonstration with the
hashtag #NetNeutrality:
Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden, dit geldt niet voor de labels: M. Copps, FCC, N. Knight, Free Press, ISPs en A. Pai,
Anti-Media publiceerde gisteren een artikel waarin duidelijk wordt gemaakt, dat de NSA (in samenwerking met de CIA, al wordt dit niet gesteld in dit artikel) zich al jaren bemoeit met verkiezingen in het buitenland.
Nu de hysterie over Russische hacks en manipulaties in de VS op haar top is, gebruikt de NSA deze hysterie, om haar bemoeienis met verkiezingen in binnen en buitenland verder uit te breiden, zogenaamd om landen te helpen tegen de ‘duivelse Russen…..’
Als er over Russische hacks en manipulaties in buitenlandse verkiezingen wordt gesproken door de NSA en CIA, gaat het telkens weer om verkiezingen waarbij VS-marionetten het onderspit delven. Mooi voorbeeld: de onlangs gehouden Franse verkiezingen. Vlak voordat deze verkiezingen plaatsvonden sprak het team van Macron ook over Russische inmenging (mede ingegeven door NSA, zoals het Anti-Media artikel aangeeft), een verhaal waar niets van overbleef, na de winst van Macron!! ‘Vreemd genoeg’ werd er daarna in de reguliere, zogenaamd onafhankelijke media niet meer over gesproken, terwijl men dit ‘nieuws’ (nep nieuws, of ‘fake news’, wat u wilt) met chocoladeletters bracht……….
De FBI bood de Russische hacker Nikulon het staatsburgerschap van de VS, geld en een gratis appartement, als hij wilde bevestigen, dat hij opdracht had gekregen van de Russische overheid om de verkiezingscampagne van Hillary Clinton te hacken……. Dit terwijl de FBI, de NSA en de CIA keer op keer durfden te zeggen, dat ze bewijzen hadden voor deze hacks in opdracht van de Russische regering…………
Uit de Vault 7 documenten op Wikileaks blijkt duidelijk, dat de CIA zich grootschalig bezig houdt met hacken en daarmee met machinaties van zaken in een groot aantal buitenlanden. Dat ook de NSA zich daarmee bezig hield en houdt, werd bewezen met het hacken van bevriende naties, waarbij zelfs de ‘slimme telefoon’ van de Duitse premier Merkel werd gehackt en getapt……..
Nogmaals, ondanks dit alles wijst men met de vieze vingers nog steeds naar Rusland voor deze zaken, terwijl daar tot op heden, nul komma nada bewijs voor werd geleverd……..
Overigens al totaal belachelijk dat men de beschuldigingen van de FBI, NSA en CIA nog serieus neemt, terwijl deze diensten zo onnoemlijk veel hebben gelogen in het verleden……….
Lees en oordeel zelf:
NSA
To Expand Surveillance Of US, Foreign Elections Over “Russian
Hacker” Fears
NSA To Expand Surveillance Of US, Foreign Elections Over “Russian Hacker” Fears
(MPN) Last
Tuesday, during his
testimony to
the Senate Armed Services Committee, National Security Agency
director Admiral Mike Rogers echoed the
previous testimonies given
by former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and other
U.S. law enforcement and intelligence officials, who have sought to
use the “Russian hacking” narrative as leverage to justify a
greater role for their own agencies in supervising U.S. elections.
Following
a question from Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI) during the hearing,
Rogers stated, “If we define election infrastructure as critical to
the nation and we are directed by the president or the secretary, I
can apply our capabilities in partnership with others – because we
won’t be the only ones, the Department of Homeland Security, the
FBI – I can apply those capabilities proactively with some of the
owners of those systems.”
In
response, Sen. Hirono asked, “You are still awaiting direction from
the president for everyone to coordinate efforts to stop this kind of
thing from Russia’s part?,” referencing statements made by Rogers
and others that have blamed Russia for interfering in elections in
the U.S. and elsewhere. However, neither Rogers nor any U.S.
intelligence agency has yet to release any proof of these
allegations.
Rogers
is not only pitching for the NSA to have a greater role in upcoming
U.S. elections but also in elections in other nations, namely France
and the United Kingdom. After a question from Senator Kirsten
Gillibrand (D-NY), Rogers stated, “We [NSA] had talked to our
French counterparts prior to the public announcements of the events
publicly attributed this past weekend and gave them a heads up.
‘Look, we’re watching the Russians. We’re seeing them penetrate
some of your infrastructure’.”
He
then added, “We’re doing similar things with our German
counterparts, with our British counterparts, they have an upcoming
election sequence.”
While
Rogers, along with several senators, are pushing for greater
oversight of the U.S. and foreign elections due to the possible
threat of “Russian hackers,” an examination of elections held
over the past year suggests that the specter of Russian interference
only emerges when the U.S. establishment’s preferred candidate or
outcome does not prevail.
Russian
specter fails to appear – except in U.S. and other elections
In
2016, elections in Iceland, Spain, Hungary, Australia and Croatia all
had outcomes that were not favorable for Russia, as the results led
to wins for pro-EU and pro-NATO interests. The Russian hacking
narrative only emerged in the U.S. election after leaks derailed
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, as well as in subsequent
elections in Bulgaria and Moldova where pro-Russian candidates won.
Another
complication for the narrative is the
curious case of Russian hacker Yevgeny Nikulin,
who stands accused of hacking U.S. corporations. According to
Nikulin, FBI agents offered him money, U.S. citizenship and a free
apartment in exchange for confessing to hacking Clinton’s campaign
and claiming that he did so under direct orders from Russian
President Vladimir Putin. If U.S. law enforcement and intelligence
agencies were so assured that Russians hacked Clinton’s emails, why
would they make offers such as this to a Russian hacker who they were
pursuing on unrelated charges?
However,
the greatest complication for those who have accused Russian hackers
of leaking Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails to Wikileaks
came yesterday. Separate
reports of
a federal investigator and a former DC homicide detective essentially
proved that Wikileaks came into possession of DNC emails through Seth
Rich, a DNC employee who – not long after he allegedly passed
emails to Wikileaks – was gunned down last July. The
substantial evidence that
the leaks came from a DNC insider and were not “hacked”
effectively demolishes the Russian hacker narrative.
Yet,
the most glaring admission from Rogers’ testimony is the fact that
the U.S. is already deeply embedded in the foreign nations they have
offered to help protect from potential election interference. As
revelations released by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden showed, the
NSA infiltrated the communication systems of France, the UK and
Germany long ago, including those used by their political leadership.
In addition, the NSA’s “Tailored Access Operations” (TAO) unit
is known to infiltrate
computers around the world in
order to aid in “foreign intelligence collection.”
In
looking at the concrete evidence available regarding past election
interference, the U.S. emerges as the most likely culprit – not the
Russians. For instance, in the 2016 election, the
state of Georgia reported multiple
hacking attempts targeting its election infrastructure, as
did other states like
Kentucky and West Virginia. These attempts were not linked to a
foreign government, but to the Department of Homeland Security.
In
addition, Wikileaks’ publications of the CIA’s “Vault 7”
hacking tools have
revealed the
intelligence agency’s ability to carry out cyber attacks that leave
digital fingerprints that can be tied to foreign state actors who are
not actually responsible for the attacks – the digital equivalent
of a “false flag” attack. Some
have suggested that
this tool was used in the recent French hack of French President
Emmanuel Macron’s emails, as Russian metadata and the names of
Russian intelligence contractors were carelessly left inside files
that were linked to the hack.
Given
that the U.S. is confirmed to have interfered in 81
elections since 1946,
it seems likely that the “Russian hacker” excuse is just a foil
for the U.S. deep state to gain greater control over U.S. elections
and those of its allies, making any future U.S.-led election
interference that much easier to accomplish.
Niet de Russen en Trumps team, maar de gefrustreerde medewerker Seth Rich van het Hillary Clinton campagne team, heeft de documenten die Clinton belastten gelekt naar Wikileaks, zo meldde Anti-Media gisteren. Rich was overigens gefrustreerd door de smerige campagne, die Clinton en haar team voerden tegen Bernie Sanders, de andere presidentskandidaat, tijdens de voorverkiezingen van de Democraten…….
Geen nieuws, dit was al lang bekend*, zo zette Julian Assange vorig jaar al een premie van $ 130,000.– op de tip die tot de aanhouding zouden leiden van de moordenaar(s), die Rich neerschoten. De politie hield het op een roofmoord, terwijl er niets van de eigendommen van Rich werden gestolen, hoewel hij voor een aanzienlijk bedrag aan sieraden droeg………
Er zijn nieuwe bewijzen opgedoken, die van de ‘Rusland manipulatie claim’ gehakt maken. Zo gaf een anonieme FBI bron toe dat men op de computer van Rich meer dan 44.000 mails van Clinton terug heeft gevonden, die Rich doorspeelde naar Wikileaks…..
Kortom: van al het gelul over Russische hacks en manipulaties blijft niets over, een claim die al niet met bewijzen werd en wordt gemaakt…… Ook Nederlandse politici, de Nederlandse geheime diensten AIVD en MIVD en de reguliere Nederlandse (afhankelijke) media, houden deze leugen in de lucht………………..
Zeker de AIVD en MIVD moeten op de hoogte zijn van deze zaak, des te schunniger dat deze waardeloze diensten deze leugens in de lucht houden, je zou dit zelfs ernstig misdadig kunnen noemen!!
In feite was Rich een klokkenluider, die ‘als dank’ werd vermoord……..
(ZHE) For
the past several months, Democrats have based their “Resist 45”
movement on unsubstantiated assertions that the Trump campaign
coordinated with Russian intelligence officials to undermine the 2016
Presidential Election thereby ‘stealing’ the White House from
Hillary Clinton. Day after day we’ve all suffered through one
anonymously sourced, “shock” story after another from the New
York Times and/or The Washington Post with new allegations of the
‘wrongdoing’.
But,
new evidence surfacing in the Seth Rich murder investigation may just
quash the “Russian hacking” conspiracy theory. According to a new
report from Fox
News,
it was former DNC staffer Seth Rich who supplied 44,000 DNC emails to
WikiLeaks and not some random Russian cyber terrorist, as we’ve all
been led to believe.
According
to Fox News, though admittedly via yet another anonymous FBI source,
Rich made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, an American
investigative reporter and director of WikiLeaks who was living in
London at the time. According
to Fox News sources, federal law enforcement investigators found
44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments sent between DNC leaders from
January 2015 to May 2016 that Rich shared with WikiLeaks before he
was gunned down on July 10, 2016.
The
Democratic National Committee staffer who was gunned down on July 10
on a Washington, D.C., street just steps from his home had leaked
thousands of internal emails to WikiLeaks, law enforcement sources
told Fox News.
A
federal investigator who reviewed an FBI forensic report detailing
the contents of DNC staffer Seth Rich’s computer generated within
96 hours after his murder, said Rich made contact with WikiLeaks
through Gavin MacFadyen, a
now-deceased American investigative reporter, documentary filmmaker,
and director of WikiLeaks who was living in London at the time.
“I
have seen and read the emails between Seth Rich and Wikileaks,” the
federal investigator told Fox News, confirming the MacFadyen
connection. He said the emails are in possession of the FBI, while
the stalled case is in the hands of the Washington Police Department.
Then,
on July 22, just 12 days after Rich was killed, WikiLeaks published
internal DNC emails that appeared to show top party officials
conspiring to stop Bernie Sanders from becoming the party’s
presidential nominee. As we’ve noted before, the DNC’s efforts to
block Sanders resulted in Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigning as DNC
chairperson.
These
new revelations seem to be consistent with the findings of Rod
Wheeler, a former DC homicide detective and Fox News contributor,
whose private investigation firm was hired by Rich’s family to
probe the case.
“My
investigation up to this point shows there was some degree of email
exchange between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks,” Wheeler told Fox
News. “I
do believe that the answers to who murdered Seth Rich sits on his
computer on a shelf at the DC police or FBI headquarters.”
“My
investigation shows someone within the D.C. government, Democratic
National Committee or Clinton team is blocking the murder
investigation from going forward,” Wheeler told Fox News. “That
is unfortunate. Seth Rich’s murder is unsolved as a result of
that.”
The
botched robbery theory, which police have pursued for nearly a year,
isn’t panning out, Wheeler said. Two assailants caught on a grainy
video tape from a camera posted outside a grocery mart, shot Rich
twice in his back, but did not take his wallet, cell phone, keys,
watch or necklace worth about $2,000.
As
you’ll recall, Rich’s death has been shrouded in mystery from the
start as he was reportedly shot from behind in the wee hours of the
morning but was not robbed of the nearly $2,000 worth of cash and
jewelry on his body at the time.
Rich
had been at Lou’s City Bar a couple of miles from his home until
about 1:15 a.m. He
walked home, calling several people along the way. He called his
father, Joel Rich, who he missed because he had gone to sleep.
He talked with a fraternity brother and his girlfriend, Kelsey Mulka.
Around
4:17 a.m., Rich was about a block from his home when Mulka, still on
the phone with him, heard voices in the background. Rich reassured
her that he was steps away from being at his front door and hung up.
Two
minutes later, Rich was shot twice. Police were on the scene within
three minutes. Rich
sustained bruising on his hands and face. He remained conscious, but
died at a nearby hospital less than two hours later.
Shortly
thereafter, Julian Assange implied that Seth Rich was, in fact, a
source for WikiLeaks and offered a $130,000 reward for information
leading to his killer.
Per
the Washington
Examiner,
Rich’s family issued the following statement, via a ‘spokesman’,
regarding the recent Fox News reports saying they have seen no
evidence of the alleged emails between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks:
“As
we’ve seen through the past year of unsubstantiated claims, we see
no facts, we have seen no evidence, we have been approached with no
emails and only learned about this when contacted by the press,” the
statement said. “Even if tomorrow, an email was found, it is not a
high enough bar of evidence to prove any interactions as emails can
be altered and we’ve seen that those interest in pushing
conspiracies will stop at nothing to do so.”
“We
are a family who is committed to facts, not fake evidence that
surfaces every few months to fill the void and distract law
enforcement and the general public from finding Seth’s
murderers. The
services of the private investigator who spoke to the press was
offered to the Rich family and paid for by a third party, and
contractually was barred from speaking to press or anyone outside of
law enforcement or the family unless explicitly authorized by the
family.”
But,
as WikiLeaks noted, the family’s “spokesman” is none other than
Democrat crisis PR consultant Brad Bauman.
Seems
that not everyone within the FBI is on board with the “Russian
hacking” narrative and are finally starting to come forward.
Finally,
we find it ‘shocking’ that while the New York Times, Washington
Post, CNN, etc are all too eager to regurgitate each others
anonymously sourced stories that are critical of Trump, not a single
one of them had a single reference of this Fox News bombshell on
their website at the time this article was published.
Hier een ‘rondje Stan van Houcke’ met twee berichten, één van afgelopen vrijdag en daaronder een bericht van afgelopen zaterdag. In het eerste artikel betoogt Paul Craig Roberts o.a., dat in het boek 1984 van George Orwell onwelgevallige informatie wordt verwijderd (ook uit de archieven), terwijl het nu al zo zot is, dat die informatie niet eens wordt gepubliceerd door de reguliere (massa-) media en het overgrote deel van de politici er geen aandacht aan besteden………
Zo liet de hoogste autoriteit van de Russische strijdkrachten, luitenant generaal Viktor Poznihir weten, dat de Russische generale staf heeft geconcludeerd dat Washington een oorlog tegen Rusland voorbereidt…… Me dunkt een bericht waarna alle seinen in de westerse reguliere media op rood hadden moeten staan….. Roberts stelt dat zegge en schrijve een dagblad in de VS dit bericht bracht, het bericht is ‘ook niet’ terug te vinden in andere westerse media……. Geen politicus heeft een woord vuil gemaakt aan deze uiterst verontrustende zaak…….
Vergeet niet dat het Pentagon, Obama en Trump al hebben gesteld, dat de VS een eerste aanval met kernwapens in de toekomst niet uitsluit, een verklaring die de Britse feeks May, die premier mag spelen, voor Groot-Brittannië herhaalde na haar aanstelling als premier…… (GB is ook een kernwapenstaat)
Dit gecombineerd met de uitlating van Poznihir, zou bij iedereen de haren overeind moeten doen staan, immers als Rusland overtuigt is dat de VS een kernaanval wil uitvoeren, waar neocons (neoconservatieven) in de VS stellen, dat de Russische kernwapens in één klap uitgeschakeld kunnen worden, is de kans groot dat Rusland ‘op de knop zal drukken……’ Immers Rusland (noch China) zullen gelaten wachten op hun vernietiging door de VS……
In de 70er en 80er jaren van de vorige eeuw, zou dit tot massale demonstraties hebben geleid in het westen, helaas is daar nu, ongelofelijk genoeg, geen sprake van, terwijl de situatie nu veel ernstiger is dan destijds………
Het tweede artikel van The Saker gaat in op die zogenaamde mogelijkheid van de VS, de kernwapens van de Russen met een eerste kernaanval uit te schakelen. Een ongelofelijk dom idee, zo wordt overduidelijk betoogd. Vandaar de concludie van The Saker, dat het gevaar niet van technologische doorbraken komt, maar uit de hoofden van neoconservatieven, die werkelijk denken dat een kernoorlog is te winnen…..
Mensen het is al met al een behoorlijk lang verhaal, maar meer dan de moeite waard!!
Are
You Ready to Die?
Paul Craig Roberts
In
George Orwell’s 1949 dystopian novel, 1984,
information that no longer is consistent with Big Brother’s
explanations is chucked down the Memory Hole. In the real American
dystopia in which we currently live, the information is never
reported at all.
On April 26—16 days ago—Lt. Gen.
Viktor Poznihir, Deputy Chief of the Main Operations Directorate of
the Russian Armed Forces, stated at the Moscow International Security
Conference that the Operations Command of the Russian General Staff
has concluded that Washington is preparing a nuclear first strike on
Russia.
The Times-Gazett in Ashland, Ohio, was
the only US print media that a Google search could turn up that
reported this most alarming of all announcements. A Google search
turned up no reports on US TV, and none on Canadian, Australian,
European, or any other media except RT and Internet sites.
I have been unable to find any report
that any US Senator or Representative or any European, Canadian, or
Australian politician has raised a voice of concern.
No one in Washington got on the
telephone to tell Putin that this was all a mistake, that the US was
not preparing a nuclear first strike on Russia, or ask Putin how this
serious situation could be defused.
Americans do not even know about it,
except for my readers.
I would have expected at least that
the CIA would have planted the story in the Washington Post, the New
York Times, CNN, MSNBC, and NPR that General Poznihir was expressing
his personal opinion, nothing to be taken seriously. But apparently
Americans and their European vassals are not to even know that such
an accussation was made.
As I reported some time ago and more
recently in my column about North Korea, the Chinese leadership has
also concluded that the US intends a nuclear first strike against
China.
Alone either Russia or China can
destroy the US. If they act together, the destruction of the US would
be redundant. What is the intelligence, if any, and morality, clearly
none, of the US leadership that recklessly and irresponsibly invites
Russia and China to preemptWashington’s attack on them with an
attack on the US?
Surely not even insouciant Americans
are so stupid as to think that Russia and China will just sit there
and wait for Washington’s nuclear attack.
I lived through every stage of the
Cold War. I participated in it. Never in my life have I experienced
the situation where two nuclear powers were convinced that the third
was going to surprise them with a nuclear attack.
I supported Trump because he, unlike
Hillary, said he would normalize relations with Russia. Instead he
has raised the tensions between the nuclear powers. Nothing is more
irresponsible or dangerous.
We currently are in the most dangerous
situation of my lifetime, and there is ZERO AWARENESS AND NO
DISCUSSION!
How can this be? Putin has been
issuing warnings for years. He has told the Western presstitute media
on more than one occasion that they, in their dishonesty, are pushing
the world to nuclear war. Putin has said over and over, “I issue
warnings and no one hears.” “How do I get through to you?”
Maybe the morons will hear when
mushroom clouds appear over Washington and New York, and Europe
ceases to exist, as it will if Europe continues the confrontation
with Russia as is required from Washington’s well-paid vassals.
Within the last several years I
reported the Chinese government’s reaction to US war plans for a
nuclear strike on China. The Chinese showed how their submarines
would destroy the West Coast of the US and their ICBM’s would finish
off the rest of the country.
I reported all of this, and it
produced no response. The Memory Hole wasn’t needed, as neither
Washington nor the presstitutes nor the Internet noticed. This is
insouciance to the thousandth degree.
In America and its subservient,
crawling on their knees vassal states, the information never gets
reported, so it never has to be put down the Memory Hole.
If you convince someone that you are
going to kill them, they are going to kill you first. A government,
such as what exists in Washington, that convinces powerful countries
that they are targeted, is a government that has no respect
whatsoever for the lives of its own people or the peoples of the
world or for any life on planet Earth.
Such a government as Washington is
evil beyond all measure, as are the media whores and European,
Canadian, Australian, and Japanese vassal states that serve
Washington at the expense of their own citizens.
Despite all their efforts to believe
otherwise, the Russian and Chinese leaderships have finally arrived,
belatedly, at the realization that Washington is evil to the core and
is the agent of Satan.
For Russia and China, the Satanic Evil
that rules in the West has reduced the choice for Russia and China to
them or us.
For
weeks now I have been getting panicked emails with readers asking me
whether the USA had developed a special technology called “super
fuses” which would make it possible for the USA to successfully
pull-off a (preemptive) disarming first strike against Russia.
Super-fuses were also mentioned in combination with an alleged lack
by Russia of a functioning space-based infrared early warning system
giving the Russians less time to react to a possible US nuclear
attack.
While
there is a factual basis to all this, the original report already
mislead the reader with a shocking title “How
US nuclear force modernization is undermining strategic stability:
The burst-height compensating super-fuze”
and by offering several unsubstantiated conclusions. Furthermore,
this original report was further discussed by many observers who
simply lack the expertise to understand what the facts mentioned in
the report really mean. Then the various sources started quoting each
other and eventually this resulted in a completely baseless “super
fuse scare”. Let’s try to make some sense of all this.
Understanding
nuclear strikes and their targets
To
understand what really has taken place I need to first define a
couple of crucial terms:
Hard-target
kill capability: this refers to the capability of a missile to
destroy a strongly protected target such as a underground missile
silo or a deeply buried command post.
Soft-target
kill capability: the capability to destroy lightly or
unprotected targets.
Counterforce
strike: this refers to a strike aimed at the enemy’s military
capabilities.
Countervalue
strike: this refers to a strike on non-military assets such as
cities.
Since
strategic nuclear missile silos and command posts are well protected
and deeply buried, only hard-target kill (HTK) capable missiles can
execute a counterforce strike. Soft-target kill (STK) capable systems
are therefore usually seen as being the ultimate retaliatory
capability to hit the enemies cities. The crucial notion here is
that HTK capability is not a function of explosive power, but
of accuracy. Yes, in theory, a hugely powerful weapon can
compensate to some degree for a lack of accuracy, but in reality both
the USA and the USSR/Russia have long understood that the real key to
HTK is accuracy.
During
the Cold War, intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) were more
accurate than submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) simply
because targeting from the surface and from a fixed position was much
easier than targeting from inside a submerged and moving submarine.
The American were the first to successfully deploy a HTK capable SLBM
with their Trident D-5. The Russians have only acquired this
capability very recently (with their R-29RMU Sineva SLBM).
According
to the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists just a decade ago only 20% of US
SLBMs were HTK capable. Now, with the ‘super-fuse’ 100% of US
SLBMs are HTK capable. What these super-fuses do is very accurately
measure the optimal altitude at which to detonate thereby partially
compensating for a lack of accuracy of a non-HTK capable weapon. To
make a long story short, these super-fuses made all US SLBMs HTK
capable.
Does
that matter?
Yes
and no. What that means on paper is that the US has just benefited
from a massive increase in the number of US missiles with HTK
capability. Thus, the US has now a much larger missile force capable
of executing a disarming counterforce strike. In reality, however,
things are much more complicated than that.
Understanding
counterforce strikes
Executing
a disarming counterforce strike against the USSR and, later, Russia
has been an old American dream. Remember Reagan’s “Star Wars”
program? The idea behind it was simple: to develop the capability to
intercept enough incoming Soviet warheads to protect the USA from a
retaliatory Soviet counter strike. It would work something like this:
destroy, say, 70% of the Soviet ICBM/SLBMs and intercept the
remaining 30% before they can reach the USA. This was total nonsense
both technologically (the technology did not exist) and strategically
(just a few Soviet “leakers” could wipe-out entire US cities, who
could take such a risk?). The more recent US deployment of
anti-ballistic missile systems in Europe has exactly the same purpose
– to protect the USA from a retaliatory counterstrike. Without
going into complex technical discussions, let’s just say that this
point in time, this system would never protect the USA from anything.
But in the future, we could imagine such a scenario
1)
The USA and Russia agree to further deep cuts in their nuclear
strategic forces thereby dramatically reducing the total number of
Russian SLBM/ICBMs.
2)
The USA deploys all around Russia anti-ballistic systems which can
catch and destroy Russian missiles in the early phase of their flight
towards the USA.
3)
The USA also deploys a number of systems in space or around the USA
to intercept any incoming Russian warhead.
4)
The USA having a very large HTK-capable force executes a successful
counterforce strike destroying 90% (or so) of the Russian
capabilities and then the rest are destroyed during their flight.
This
is the dream. It will never work. Here is why:
1)
The Russians will not agree to deep cuts in their nuclear strategic
forces
2)
The Russians already have deployed the capability to destroy the
forward deployed US anti-ballistic system in Europe.
3)
Russian warheads and missiles are now maneuverable and can even use
any trajectory, including over the South Pole, to reach the USA. New
Russian missiles have a dramatically shorter and faster first stage
burn period making them much harder to intercept.
4)
Russia’s reliance on ballistic missiles will be gradually replaced
with strategic (long-range) cruise missiles (more about that later)
5)
This scenario mistakenly assumes that the USA will know where the
Russian SLBM launching submarines will be when they launch and that
they will be able to engage them (more about that later)
6)
This scenario completely ignores the Russian road-mobile and
rail-mobile ICBMs (more about that later)
Understanding
MIRVs
Before
explaining points 4, 5 and 6 above, I need to mention another
important fact: one missile can carry either one single warhead or
several (up to 12 and more). When a missile carries several
independently targetable warheads it is called MIRVed as in “multiple
independently targetable reentry vehicle”.
MIRVs
are important for several reasons. First, one single missile with 10
warheads can, in theory, destroy 10 different targets. Alternatively,
one single missile can carry, say 3-4 real warheads and 6-7 decoys.
In practical terms what look like one missile on take-off can turn
into 5 real warheads, all targeted at different objectives and
another 5 fake decoys designed to make interception that more
difficult. MIRVs, however, also present a big problem: they are
lucrative targets. If with one of “my” nuclear warheards I can
destroy 1 of “your” MIRVed missiles, I lose 1 warhead but you
lose 10. This is one of the reasons the
USA is moving away from land-based MIRVed ICBMs.
The
important consideration here is that Russia has a number of possible
options to chose from and how many of her missiles will be MIRVed is
impossible to predict. Besides, all US and Russian SLBMs will remain
MIRVed for the foreseeable future (de-MIRVing SLBMs make no sense,
really, since the entire nuclear missile carrying submarine (or SSBN)
is a gigantic MIRVed launching pad by definition).
In
contrast to MIRVed missile, single warheads missiles are very bad
targets to try to destroy using nuclear weapons: even if “my”
missile destroys “yours” we both lost 1 missile each. What is the
point? Worse, if I have to use 2 of “mine” to make really sure
that “yours” is really destroyed, my strike will result in me
using 2 warheads in exchange for only 1 of yours. This makes no sense
at all.
Finally,
in retaliatory countervalue strikes, MIRVed ICBM/SLBMs are a
formidable threat: just one single R-30 Bulava (SS-N-30) SLBM or one
single R-36 Voevoda (SS-18) ICBM can destroy ten American cities. Is
that a risk worth taking? Say the USA failed to destroy one single
Borei-class SSBN – in theory that could mean that this one SSBN
could destroy up to 200 American cities (20 SLBMs with 10 MIRVs
each). How is that for a risk?
Contrasting
the US and Russian nuclear triad
Strategic
nuclear weapons can be deployed on land, in the oceans or delivered
by aircraft. This is called the “nuclear triad”. I won’t
discuss the aircraft based part of the US and Russian triads here, as
they don’t significantly impact the overall picture and because
they are roughly comparable. The sea and land based systems and their
underlying strategies could not be any more different. At sea, the
USA has had HTK capabilities for many years now and the US decided to
hold the most important part of the US nuclear arsenal in SSBNs. In
contrast, the Russians chose to develop road-mobile intercontinental
ballistic missiles. The very first one was the RT-2PM Topol (SS-25)
deployed in 1985, followed by the T-2PM2 «Topol-M» (SS-27) deployed
in 1997 and the revolutionary RT-24 Yars or Topol’-MR (SS-29)
deployed in 2010 (the US considered deployed road-mobile strategic
missiles, but never succeeded in developing the technology).
The
Russians are also deploying rail-mobile missiles called RT-23
Molodets (SS-24) and are about to deploy a newer version called RS-27
Barguzin (SS-31?). This is what they look like:
SSBNs
and road and rail mobile missiles all have two things in common: they
are mobile and they rely on concealment for survival as neither of
them can hope to survive. The SSBN hides in the depths of the ocean,
the road-mobile missile launcher drives around the immense Russian
expanses and can hide, literally, in any forest. As for the
rail-mobile missile train, it hides by being completely
indistinguishable from any other train on the huge Russian railroad
network (even from up close it is impossible to tell whether what you
are seeing is a regular freight train or a missile launching special
train). To destroy these systems, accuracy is absolutely not enough:
you need to find them and you need to find them before they fire
their missiles. And that is, by all accounts, quite impossible.
The
Russian Navy likes to keep its SSBNs either under the polar ice-cap
or in so-called “bastions” such as the Sea of Okhotsk. While
these are not really “no-go” zones for US attack submarines
(SSN), they are extremely dangerous areas where the Russian Navy has
a huge advantage over the US (if only because the US attack submarine
cannot count on the support of surface ships or aircraft). The US
Navy has some of the best submarines on the planet and superbly
trained crews, but I find the notion that US SSNs could find and
destroy all Russian SSBNs before the latter can launch unlikely in
the extreme.
As
for the land-based rail-mobile and road-mobile missiles, they are
protected by Russian Air Defenses which are the most advanced on the
planet, not the kind of airspace the US would want to send B-53, B-1
or B-2 bombers in. But most importantly, these missiles are
completely hidden so even if the USA could somehow destroy them, it
would failed to find enough of them to make a first disarming strike
a viable option. By the way, the RS-24 has four MIRVs (make that 4 US
cities) while the RS-27 will have between 10 and 16 (make that
another 10 to 16 US cities vaporized).
Looking
at geography and cruise missiles
Finally,
let’s take a look at geography and cruise missiles. Two Russian
cruise missiles are especially important to us: the Kh-102 and the
3M-14K(?):
KH-102
3M-14K
Range:
5500km
2600km
Launcher:
Strategic
bomber
Aircraft,
ship, container
Warhead:
Nuclear
450kt
Nuclear
(unknown)
What
is important with these two cruise missiles is that the KH-102 has a
huge range and that the KM-14K can be fired from aircraft, ships and
even containers. Take a look at this video which shows the
capabilities of this missile:
Now
consider where the vast majority of US cities are located – right
along the East and West coasts of the USA and the fact that the US
has no air defenses of any kind protecting them. A Russian strategic
bomber could hit any West Coast city from the middle of the Pacific
ocean. As for a Russian submarine, it could hit any US city from the
middle of the Atlantic. Finally, the Russians could conceal an
unknown number of cruise missile in regular looking shipping
container (flying a Russian flag or, for that matter, any other flag)
and simply sail to the immediate proximity to the US coast and
unleash a barrage of nuclear cruise missiles.
How
much reaction time would such a barrage give the US government?
Understanding
reaction time
It
is true that the Soviet and Russian space-based early warning system
is in bad shape. But did you know that China never bothered
developing such a space based system in the first place? So what is
wrong with the Chinese, are they stupid, technologically backward or
do they know something we don’t?
To
answer that question we need to look at the options facing a country
under nuclear missile attack. The first option is called “launch
on warning”:
you see the incoming missiles and you press the “red button”
(keys in reality) to launch your own missiles. That is sometimes
referred to as “use them or lose them”. The next option is
“launch on strike”:
you launch all you got as soon as a nuclear strike on your territory
is confirmed. And, finally, there is the “retaliation
after ride-out“:
you absorb whatever your enemy shot at you, then take a decision to
strike back. What is obvious is that China has adopted, whether by
political choice or due to limitation in space capabilities, either a
“launch on strike” or a “retaliation after ride-out” option.
This is especially interesting since China possesses relatively few
nuclear warheads and even fewer real long range ICBMs .
Contrast
that with the Russians who have recently confirmed that they have
long had a “dead hand system” called “Perimetr”
which automatically ascertains that a nuclear attack has taken place
and then automatically launches a counterstrike. That would be a
“launch on strike” posture, but it is also possible that Russia
has a double-posture: she tries to have the capability to launch on
warning, but double-secures herself with an automated “dead hand”
“launch on strike” capability.
Take
a look at this estimate of worldwide stocks of strategic nuclear
warheads: While China is credited with only 260 warheads, Russia
still has a whopping 7,000 warheads. And a “dead hand”
capability. And yet China feels confident enough to announce a “no
first use” policy. How can they say that with no space-based
nuclear missile launch detection capability?
Many
will say that the Chinese wished they had more nukes and a
space-based based nuclear missile launch detection capability, but
that their current financial and technological means simply do not
allow that. Maybe. But my personal guess is that they realize that
even their very minimal force represents a good enough deterrent for
any potential aggressor. And they might have a point.
Let
me ask you this: how many US generals and politicians would be
willing to sacrifice just one major US city in order to disarm China
or Russia? Some probably would. But I sure hope that the majority
would realize that the risk will always remain huge.
For
one thing, modern nuclear warfare has, so far, only been “practiced”
only on paper and with computers (and thank God for that!)? So nobody
*really* knows for sure how a nuclear war would play itself out. The
only thing which is certain is that just the political and economic
consequences of it would be catastrophic and totally unpredictable.
Furthermore, it remains very unclear how such a war could be stopped
short of totally destroying one side. The so-called “de-escalation”
is a fascinating concept, but so far nobody has really figured this
out. Finally, I am personally convinced that both the USA and Russia
have more than enough survivable nuclear weapons to actually decide
to ride out a full-scale enemy attack. That is the one big issue
which many well-meaning pacifist never understood: it is a good thing
that “the USA and Russia have the means to blow-up the world ten
times over” simply because even one side succeeded in destroying,
say, 95% of the US or Russian nuclear forces, the remaining 5% would
be more than enough to wipe-out the attacking side in a devastating
countervalue attack. If Russia and the USA each had, say, only 10
nuclear warheads then the temptation to try to take them out would be
much higher.
This
is scary and even sick, but having a lot of nuclear weapons is safer
from a “first-strike
stability”
point of view than having few. Yes, we do live in a crazy world.
Consider
that in times of crisis both the US and Russia would scramble their
strategic bombers and keep them in the air, refueling them when
needed, for as long as needed to avoid having them destroyed on the
ground. So even if the USA destroyed ALL Russian ICBM/SLBMs, there
would be quite a few strategic bombers in holding patterns in staging
areas which could be given the order to strike. And here we reach one
last crucial concept:
Counterforce
strikes require a lot of HTK capable warheads.
The estimates by
both sides are kept secret, of course, but we are talking over 1000
targets on each side at least listed, if not actually targeted. But a
countervalue strike would require much less. The US has only 10
cities with over one million people. Russia has only 12. And,
remember, in theory one warhead is enough for one city (that is not
true, but for all practical purposes it is). Just look what 9/11 did
to the USA and imagine of, say, “only” Manhattan had been truly
nuked. You can easily imagine the consequences.
Conclusion
1: super-fuses are not really that super at all
The
super-fuses scare is so overblown that it is almost an urban legend.
The fact is that even if all the US SLBMs are now HTK capable and
even if Russia does not have a functional space-based missile launch
detection capability (she is working on a new one, by the way), this
in no way affects the fundamental fact that there is nothing, nothing
at all, that the USA could come up with to prevent Russia from
obliterating the USA in a retaliatory strike. The opposite is also
true, the Russians have exactly zero hope of nuking the USA and
survive the inevitable US retaliation.
The
truth is that as far back as the early 1980s Soviet (Marshal Ogarkov)
and US specialists had already come to the conclusion that a nuclear
war was unwinnable. In the past 30 years two things have dramatically
changed the nature of the game: first, an increasing number of
conventional weapons have become comparable in their effects to small
nuclear weapons and cruise missiles have become vastly more capable.
The trend today is for low-RCS (stealth) long range hypersonic cruise
missiles and maneuvering ICBM warheads which will make it even harder
to detect and intercept them. Just think about it: if the Russians
fired a cruise missile volley from a submarine say, 100km off the US
coast, how much reaction time will the US have? Say that these
low-RCS missile would begin flying at medium altitude being for all
practical purpose invisible to radar, infra-red and even sound, then
lower themselves down to 3-5 m over the Atlantic and then accelerate
to a Mach 2 or Mach 3 speed. Sure, they will become visible to radars
once they crosses the horizon, but the remaining reaction time would
be measured in seconds, not minutes. Besides, what kind of weapon
system could stop that missile type of anyway? Maybe the kind of
defenses around a US aircraft carrier (maybe), but there is simply
nothing like that along the US coast.
As
for ballistic missile warheads, all the current and foreseeable
anti-ballistic systems rely on calculations for a non-maneuvering
warhead. Once the warheads begin to make turns and zig-zag, then the
computation needed to intercept them become harder by several orders
of magnitude. Some Russian missiles, like the R-30 Bulava, can even
maneuver during their initial burn stage, making their trajectory
even harder to estimate (and the missile itself harder to intercept).
The
truth is that for the foreseeable future ABM systems will be much
more expensive and difficult to build then ABM-defeating missiles.
Also, keep in mind that an ABM missile itself is also far, far more
expensive than a warhead. Frankly, I have always suspected that the
American obsession with various types of ABM technologies is more
about giving cash to the Military Industrial Complex and, at best,
developing new technologies useful elsewhere.
Conclusion
2: the nuclear deterrence system remains stable, very stable
At
the end of WWII, the Soviet Union’s allies, moved by the
traditional western love for Russia, immediately proceeded to plan
for a conventional and a nuclear war against the Soviet Union
(see Operation Unthinkable and Operation
Dropshot).
Neither plan was executed, the western leaders were probably rational
enough not to want to trigger a full-scale war against the armed
forces which had destroyed roughly 80% of the Nazi war machine. What
is certain, however, is that both sides fully understood that the
presence of nuclear weapons profoundly changed the nature of warfare
and that the world would never be the same again: for the first time
in history all of mankind faced a truly existential threat. As a
direct result of this awareness, immense sums of money were given to
some of the brightest people on the planet to tackle the issue of
nuclear warfare and deterrence. This huge effort resulted in an
amazingly redundant, multi-dimensional and sophisticated system which
cannot be subverted by any one technological breakthrough. There is
SO much redundancy and security built into the Russian and American
strategic nuclear forces that a disarming first strike is all but
impossible, even if we make the most unlikely and far-fetched
assumptions giving one side all the advantages and the other all the
disadvantages. For most people it is very hard to wrap their heads
around such a hyper-survivable system, but both the USA and Russia
have run hundreds and even thousands of very advanced simulations of
nuclear exchanges, spending countless hours and millions of dollars
trying to find a weak spot in the other guy’s system, and each time
the result was the same: there is always enough to inflict an
absolutely cataclysmic retaliatory counter-strike.
Conclusion
3: the real danger to our common future
The
real danger to our planet comes not from a sudden technological
breakthrough which would make nuclear war safe, but from the demented
filled minds of the US Neocons who believe that they can bring Russia
to heel in a game of “nuclear chicken”. These Neocons have
apparently convinced themselves that making conventional threats
against Russia, such as unilaterally imposing no-fly zones over
Syria, does not bring us closer to a nuclear confrontation. It does.
The
Neocons love to bash the United Nations in general, and the veto
power of the Permanent Five (P5) at the UN Security Council, but they
apparently forgot the reason why this veto power was created in the
first place: to outlaw any action which could trigger a nuclear war.
Of course, this assumes that the P5 all care about international law.
Now that the USA has clearly become a rogue state whose contempt for
international law is total, there is no legal mechanism left to stop
the US from committing actions which endanger the future of mankind.
This is what is really scary, not “super-fuses”.
What
we are facing today is a nuclear rogue state run by demented
individuals who, steeped in a culture of racial superiority, total
impunity and imperial hubris, are constantly trying to bring us
closer to a nuclear war. These people are not constrained by
anything, not morals, not international law, not even common sense or
basic logic. In truth, we are dealing with a messianic cult every bit
as insane as the one of Jim Jones or Adolf Hitler and like all
self-worshiping crazies they profoundly believe in their
invulnerability.
It
is the immense sin of the so-called “Western world” that it let
these demented individuals take control with little or no resistance
and that now almost the entire western society lack the courage to
even admit that it surrendered itself to what I can only call a
satanic cult. Alexander Solzhenitsyn prophetic words spoken in 1978
have now fully materialized:
A decline in courage may be the most striking feature that an outside observer notices in the West today. The Western world has lost its civic courage, both as a whole and separately, in each country, in each government, in each political party, and, of course, in the United Nations. Such a decline in courage is particularly noticeable among the ruling and intellectual elites, causing an impression of a loss of courage by the entire society. There are many courageous individuals, but they have no determining influence on public life (Harvard Speech, 1978)
Five
years later, Solzhenitsyn warned us again saying,
To the ill-considered hopes of the last two centuries, which have reduced us to insignificance and brought us to the brink of nuclear and non-nuclear death, we can propose only a determined quest for the warm hand of God, which we have so rashly and self-confidently spurned. Only in this way can our eyes be opened to the errors of this unfortunate twentieth century and our hands be directed to setting them right. There is nothing else to cling to in the landslide: the combined vision of all the thinkers of the Enlightenment amounts to nothing. Our five continents are caught in a whirlwind. But it is during trials such as these that the highest gifts of the human spirit are manifested. If we perish and lose this world, the fault will be ours alone.
We
have been warned, but will we heed that warning?
Klik voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, op één van de labels die u hieronder terug kan vinden, dit geldt (nog) niet voor de labels: HTK, ICBM, MIRV, SLBM, SSBN, SSN, STK en super-fuse
Vandaag 69 jaar geleden begon wat de Palestijnen ‘al-Nakba’ (de catastrofe) zijn gaan noemen. Op die dag begonen de zionistische paramilitairen en Israëlische strijdkrachten met de verdrijving van Palestijnen van hun grond, waar velen al generaties lang woonden…….. Tot 1949 werden er in totaal rond de 1 miljoen Palestijnen verdreven, zodat de joodse bevolking de meerderheid kon vormen……
Overigens kwam er allesbehalve een eind aan de verdrijving en (bloedige) onderdrukking van Palestijnen, al zijn de methoden tegenwoordig iets anders. Zo hebben de zionisten nu het leven van de Palestijnen op de door Israël illegaal bezette West Bank feitelijk bijna onmogelijk gemaakt. Boeren zijn afgesneden van hun land, dat na verloop van tijd door illegale joodse nederzettingen is/wordt geannexeerd…..
De Gazastrook is veranderd in een getto, nou zeg maar openluchtgevangenis, met 2 miljoen Palestijnen, waar Israël keer op keer boedbaden aanricht…….. Recht uit het handboek van de SS…..
De berichtgeving in Nederland over de strijd die plaatsvond in Palestina (dat uiteraard wordt aangeduid als Israël) door de reguliere media is altijd pro-zionistisch geweest. Vond nog een ‘mooi voorbeeld’ op de site van Andere Tijden:
Tot december 1947, totdat joodse terroristen 7 Arabieren bij de poort van het complex opbliezen en Palestijnse moordenaars als vergelding 39 joodse arbeiders afslachtten. Het valt me nog mee, dat de joodse psychopaten terroisten worden genoemd, maar dat ‘moordenaars’ zegt genoeg………
Vergelijk dit eens met het volgende citaat van Andere Tijden:
Twee weken eerder had een joodse strijdgroep een slachting aangericht onder de bewoners van Deir Yassin, een dorp bij Jeruzalem. Inderdaad de woorden terroristen en moordenaars vallen niet eens, terwijl het hier om de moord op mannen, vrouwen en kinderen ging……..
Het aantal vermoorde Palestijnen in de paar jaar na 1947 ligt volgens zeggen op meer dan 12.000, waarvan een fiks aantal werden afgeslecht zoals hiervoor beschreven door Andere Tijden…….. Overigens noemt AndereTijden het aantal vermoorde Palestijnen niet, tekenend voor Nederlandse berichtgeving…..
.
De Palestijnen moeten al meer dan 69 jaar bloeden voor het westerse antisemitisme. De hoogste tijd dat hier een eind aan komt! Steund de BDS beweging tegen de fascistische apartheidsstaat Israël!!
Sinds kort zijn meer dan 1.000 Palestijnse gevangen in hongerstaking gegaan, ook al een feit ‘waar veel aandacht voor is’ in Nederland………
Hier het bericht dat ik vandaag ontving van het Palestinian BDS National Committee:
BDS:
Upholding our Rights, Resisting the Ongoing Nakba
The
BNC Commemorates the 69th Anniversary of the Palestinian NakbaYou
can also view it on our website here.
May
15, 2017, Occupied Palestine – Today marks the 69th
anniversary of the 1948
Nakba,
the mass expulsion of Palestinians from our homeland. Between 1947
and 1949, Zionist paramilitaries, and subsequently Israeli forces,
made 750,000 to one
million indigenous
Palestinians into refugees to establish a Jewish-majority state in
Palestine.
The Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions
National Committee (BNC)
calls on people of conscience the world over to further intensify BDS
campaigns to end academic, cultural, sports, military and economic
links of complicity with Israel’s regime
of occupation, settler-colonialism and apartheid.
This is the most effective means of standing with the Palestinian
people in pursuing our inherent and UN-stipulated rights, and
nonviolently resisting the ongoing, intensifying Nakba.
The
Israeli regime today is ruthlessly pursuing the one constant strategy
of its settler-colonial project —the simultaneous pillage and
colonization of as much Palestinian land as possible and the gradual
ethnic cleansing of
as many Palestinians as practical without evoking international
sanctions.
Following
in the footsteps of all previous Israeli governments, the current
far-right government, the most openly racist in Israel’s history,
is heeding the words of the Zionist leader Ze’ev Jabotinsky
who wrote in
1923:
“Every
native population in the world resists colonists as long as it has
the slightest hope of being able to rid itself of the danger of being
colonised. […] Zionist colonisation must either stop, or else
proceed regardless of the native population. Which means that it can
proceed and develop only under the protection of a power that is
independent of the native population—behind an iron wall, which the
native population cannot breach.”
Sixty-nine
years after the systematic, premeditated uprooting and dispossession
of most of the indigenous Palestinian Arabs from the land of
Palestine at the hands of Zionist gangs and later the state of
Israel, the Nakba is not over. Israel is intent on building its “iron
wall” in Palestinian minds, not just our lands, through its
sprawling illegal settlements and concrete walls in the occupied
Palestinian territory, its genocidal
siege of
over 2 million Palestinians in Gaza, its denial of
the Palestinian
refugee’s right to return,
its racist
laws and
policies against Palestinians inside Israel, and its escalating,
violent ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem,
the Jordan
Valley and
the Naqab (Negev).
It is sparing no brutality in its relentless, desperate attempts to
sear into our consciousness the futility of resistance and the
vainness of hope.
The
present mass
hunger strike by
over one thousand Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails and the
grassroots support that it has triggered give us hope.
The
growing support for BDS among international trade unions, including
the most recent adoption by the Norwegian
Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) –
representing over 910,000 workers – of an
“international economic, cultural and academic boycott of Israel”
to achieve comprehensive Palestinian rights, gives us hope.
The
BDS movement has succeeded in sharply raising the price of corporate
complicity in Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people. It
has compelled companies of the size of Orange and Veolia to
end their complicity and pushed global giant G4S to
begin exiting the Israeli market. Churches, city councils and
thousands around the world have pledged to boycott Hewlett Packard
(HP)
for its deep complicity in Israel’s occupation and apartheid. This
gives us and many human rights campaigns around the world great hope.
The Barcelona municipality’s
decision to end complicity with Israel’s occupation, coming on the
heels of tens of local councils in the Spanish state declaring
themselves “Israeli
apartheid free zones,”
give us hope.
The
divestment by some of the largest mainline churches in the US,
including the United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian
Church USA and
the United
Church of Christ,
from Israeli
banks or
complicit international corporations gives us hope.
The
spread of remarkably effective BDS campaigns from South Africa to
South Korea, from Egypt to Chile, and from the UK to the US gives us
real hope.
The growing
intersectional coalitions that
are emerging in many countries, organically re-connecting the
struggle for Palestinian rights with the diverse international
struggles for racial, economic, gender, climate and indigenous
justice give us unlimited hope.
In
1968, twenty years after the Nakba but unrelated to it, Dr. Martin
Luther King said,
“There can be no justice without peace and there can be no peace
without justice.” For seven decades, and against all odds,
Palestinians have continued to assert our inalienable right to
self-determination and to genuine peace, which can only stem from
freedom, justice and equality.
But
to reach that just peace we realize that we must nourish our hope for
a dignified life with our boundless commitment to resist injustice,
resist apathy and, crucially, resist their “iron walls” of
despair.
In
this context, the Palestinian-led, global BDS movement with
its impressive
growth and
unquestionable impact is today an indispensable component of our
popular resistance and the most promising form of international
solidarity with our struggle for rights.
No
iron wall of theirs can suppress or overshadow the rising sun of our
emancipation.
The
Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC)
is the largest coalition in Palestinian civil society. It leads and
supports the global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.
Visit www.bdsmovement.net and
follow @BDSmovement
============================
Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u hieronder terug kan vinden, dit geldt niet voor de labels: BNC, Jabotinski en al-Nakba .
De pogingen om Rusland zonder enig bewijs te beschuldigen van het hacken en manipuleren van de verkiezingen in de VS, hebben alles te maken met het feit dat Rusland eindelijk obstakels wist op te werpen voor de VS en haar psychopathisch, moorddadig buitenlandbeleid!!
Zo is het artikel op Counterpunch van Mike Whitney samen te vatten, een artikel dat op 13 mei ook door Information Clearing House werd gebracht.
Nogmaals wijst Whitney, volkomen terecht op het feit, dat er voor deze beschuldigen gedaan door de VS, geen nanometer bewijs is. Ondanks dat houden de westerse zogenaamd onafhankelijke reguliere media vol (zoals het overgrote deel van de westerse politici) dat Rusland de verkiezingen in de VS middels hacken en het brengen van ‘fake news’ (nepnieuws) heeft gemanipuleerd.
De hysterie daarover is alleen maar toegenomen en het ene na andere westerse land dat met verkiezingen te maken had of heeft, beschuldigen NB op basis van de VS leugens, Rusland van dezelfde zaak in deze verkiezingen…….. Zoals u al begrepen had: ook voor deze beweringen is geen greintje bewijs!!
Dit alles, terwijl wel bewezen is, dat de NSA bevriende EU landen hackte. Dat de VS op basis van grove leugens de ene na de andere illegale oorlog is begonnen en een deel van de westerse bondgenoten op basis van diezelfde leugens wist mee te krijgen. Waar alle westerse landen die leugens (‘fake news‘) overnamen en als bewezen kwalificeerden……… Nogmaals: dit nadat de VS deze eeuw al 4 keer bewezen heeft gelogen over zaken, waarop het een illegale oorlog begon (de 4de keer, middels de oorlog tegen Syrië. Deze oorlog wordt nog steeds als een binnenlandse aangelegenheid gezien, terwijl de VS zelfs al sinds Reagan bezig was met het plannen van een coup in Syrië*, zo bleek uit officiële CIA documenten op Wikileaks gepubliceerd (daarover zal ik op een later tijdstip berichten)
Jammer dat Whitney in zijn artikel Oekraïne noemt als land, waar Rusland de VS blokkeerde in haar pogingen een hen welwillende regering te installeren en de boel daarmee overnemend. Deze poging is wel degelijk geslaagd en het lullige is, dat Rusland daar niets tegen heeft kunnen doen. Sterker nog: ondanks alle leugens is er alweer totaal geen bewijs voor Russische militaire actie in het oosten van Oekraïne……. Alweer: deze leugen, ofwel ‘fake news’ over Russische acties in Oost-Oekraïne, werd en wordt door dezelfde reguliere westerse mediaorganen en politici volgehouden als waarheid……..
Wat betreft De Krim was het juist de bevolking, ook de oorspronkelijke, die in een door internationale waarnemers goedgekeurd referendum, besloot zich bij Rusland aan te sluiten! Dit is op zeker te danken aan het feit, dat de bevolking van De Krim goed pissig was over de VS geregisseerde opstand en staatsgreep (met 4 miljard dollar!!) tegen de ook door hen democratisch gekozen president Janoekovytsj….. Waar de klap op de spreekwoordelijke vuurpijl bestond uit de door de VS geparachuteerde neonazi-junta van Porosjenko, een junta waaronder de bevolking van De Krim terecht niet wenste te leven!!
Ook deze aansluiting van De Krim bij Rusland wordt door de reguliere westerse media, politici en oorlogshitsers in de NAVO voorgesteld als een agressieve Russische daad: De Krim zou zijn geannexeerd door Rusland……
Verder een prima artikel van Whitney (onder het artikel kan u klikken voor een ‘Dutch vertaling’):
There’s
no proof that Russian officials or Russian agents colluded with
members of the Trump campaign.
There’s
no proof that Russia provided material support of any kind for the
Trump campaign or that Russian agents hacked Hillary Clinton’s
emails or that Russian officials provided Wikileaks with emails that
were intended to sabotage Hillary’s chances to win the
election.
So
far, no one in any of the 17 US intelligence agencies has
stepped forward and verified the claims of Russian meddling or
produced a scintilla of hard evidence that Russia was in anyway
involved in the 2016 elections.
No
proof means no proof. It means that the people and
organizations that are making these uncorroborated claims have no
basis for legal action, no presumption of wrongdoing, and no grounds
for prosecution. They have nothing. Zilch. Their claims,
charges and accusations are like the soap bubbles we give
to our children and grandchildren. The brightly-colored
bubbles wobble across the sky for a minute or two and then,
Poof, they vanish into the ether. The claims of Russia hacking are
like these bubbles. They are empty, unsubstantiated rumors
completely devoid of substance. Poof.
It
has been eight months since the inception of
this unprecedentedly-pathetic and
infinitely-irritating propaganda campaign, and in those eight
months neither the media nor the politicos nor the Intel agents who
claim to be certain that Russia meddled in US elections, have
produced anything that even remotely resembles evidence. Instead,
they have trotted out the same lie over and over again ad
nauseam from every newspaper, every tabloid and every televised
news program in the country. Over and over and over again. The
media’s persistence is nearly as impressive as its
cynicism, which is the one quality that they seem to have
mastered. The coverage has been relentless, ubiquitous,
pernicious and mendacious. The only problem is that there’s
not a grain of truth to any of it. It is all 100 percent, unalloyed
baloney.
So
it doesn’t matter how many Democratic senators and congressmen
disgrace themselves by lighting their hair on fire and
howling about “evil Putin” or the imaginary “threats to our
precious democracy”. Nor does it matter how many hyperbolic
articles appear in media alleging sinister activities and
espionage by diabolical Moscow Central. It doesn’t
matter because there is have absolutely zero solid evidence to
support their ludicrous and entirely politically-based claims.
Whether
Russia was involved in the US elections or not, is a matter of
pure speculation. But speculation is not sufficient grounds for
appointing a special prosecutor, nor are the lies and misinformation
that appear daily in our leading newspapers, like the
dissembling New York Times, the dissemblingWashington Post and
the dissembling Wall Street Journal. The call for a special
prosecutor is not based on evidence, it is based on politics, the
politics of personal destruction. The Democrats and the media want
this tool so they can rummage through whatever private
information or paperwork anyone in the Trump administration
might possess. So while they might not dig up anything relevant to
the Russia hacking investigation, they will certainly gather
enough sordid or suspicious information to annihilate the
people in their crosshairs. And that’s precisely what
the special prosecutor provision is designed to do; it provides
the administration’s rivals with the weapons they
need to conduct a massive fishing expedition aimed at character
assassination and, ultimately, impeachment.
But,
why?
Because
Donald Trump had the audacity to win an election that was earmarked
for establishment favorite and globalist warmonger-in-chief,
Hillary Clinton. That’s what this witch hunt is all about, sour
grapes.
But
why has Russia been chosen as the target in this deep state-media
scam? What has Russia done to deserve all the negative press and
unsupported claims of criminal meddling?
That’s
easy. Just look at a map. For the last 16 years, the US has been
rampaging across North Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia.
Washington intends to control critical oil and natural gas reserves
in the ME, establish military bases across Central Asia, and remain
the dominant player in an area of that is set to become the most
populous and prosperous region of the world. It’s the Great Game
all over again, only this time-around, Uncle Sam is in the drivers
seat not the Queen of England.
But
one country has upset that plan, blocked that plan, derailed that
plan.
Russia.
Russia
has stopped Washington’s murderous marauding and genocidal
depredations in Ukraine and Syria, which is why the US foreign
policy establishment is so pissed-off. US elites aren’t used
to obstacles.
For
the last quarter of a century– since the fall of the Berlin
Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Union– the world had
been Washington’s oyster. If the president of the United
States wanted to invade a country in the Middle East, kill a
million people, and leave the place in a smoldering pile of rubble,
then who could stop him?
Nobody. Because Washington owns this fucking planet and everyone else
is just a visitor.
Capisce?
But
now all that’s changed. Now “evil Putin” has thrown up a
roadblock to US hegemony in Syria and Ukraine. Now Washington’s
landbridge to Central Asia has been split in two, and
its plan to control vital pipeline corridors from Qatar to the
EU is no longer viable. Russia has stopped Washington
dead-in-its tracks and Washington is furious.
The
anti-Russia hysteria in the western media is equal to the pain the US
foreign policy establishment is currently experiencing. And the
reason the foreign policy establishment is in so much pain, is
because they are not getting their way. It’s that simple.
Their global strategy is in a shambles because Russia will not let
them topple the Syrian government, install their own puppet regime,
redraw the map of the Middle East, run roughshod over international
law, and tighten their grip on another battered war-torn part of
the world.
So
now Russia must pay. Putin must be demonized and derided. The
American people must be taught to hate Russia and all-things Russian.
And, most of all, Russia must be blamed for anything and everything
under the sun, including the firing of a completely worthless
sack of shit FBI Director, James Comey, who– at various times
in his career– “approved or defended some of the worst abuses of
the Bush administration….including torture,
warrantless wiretapping, and indefinite detention.” (ACLU)
This
is the low-down, good-for-nothing scalawag that the Democrats
are now defending tooth in nail.
It’s
pathetic.
Russia
has become the all-purpose punching bag because
Washington’s plans for global domination have gone up in smoke.
