De Russisch – Saoedische olie-oorlog was niet tegen elkaar gericht, maar tegen de VS productie van schaliegas en -olie

De
zogenaamde ‘olie-oorlog’ tussen Saoedi-Arabië en Rusland, gevoerd
voor de prijs van olie was niet gericht tegen elkaar, maar tegen de
schaliegas en schalie-olie productie van de VS en niet in de laatste plaats daar de VS zich voor de zoveelste
keer niet wenst te houden aan afspraken gemaakt door de OPEC.

De
VS weigert simpelweg minder olie en gas te produceren, anders dan
door ‘natuurlijke oorzaak’, zoals de Coronacrisis die zorgt voor een
fiks verminderde vraag naar olie en gas….. Sterker nog: de VS noemt
deze ‘natuurlijke vermindering van productie’ een vermindering van
productie zoals bedoelt door de OPEC, terwijl de OPEC landen te maken hebben met
eenzelfde vermindering van vraag naar olie en gas, en
daarbovenop een vermindering van deze productie wensen om de prijs
weer op peil te krijgen…….

In feite
is de VS dom bezig, immers een vermindering van het aanbod aan olie en gas zou de prijs voor de schalie-olie en schaliegas-winning juist meer rendabel maken….. Deze winning van gas en olie wordt zwaar gesubsidieerd en met een verminderd aanbod zou de prijs zoals gezegd omhooggaan, waardoor subsidiëring meer lucratief is. Door het niet handelen van de  VS op de vraag van de OPEC en de reactie daarop van Saoedi-Arabië en Rusland  daalde de olieprijs zover dat men in de VS nog meer geld moet toeleggen op elk geproduceerd vat
olie…. Precies dat laatste was dan ook de bedoeling van vooral
Saoedi-Arabië, daar haar olie (en dat van Rusland) een stuk
goedkoper kan worden gewonnen en men wel ruimte heeft voor een ‘tijdelijke’ prijsverlaging.

Lullig voor Saoedi-Arabië maar Trump heeft
nog eens laten weten dat zonder de VS het Saoedische koningshuis nog
geen 2 weken kan standhouden, waarna de psychopathische moordenaar Mohammad bin Salman (MBS), de Saoedische kroonprins,
weer braaf luistert naar wat de meesters in de VS wensen: een fikse
reductie op de productie, zodat de winning van schalie-olie weer
lucratief wordt en dat is zo als een vat olie minstens $ 40.– oplevert (ook al wordt deze productie nog steeds
gesubsidieerd, zelfs als was het alleen door de niet aan milieuregels
gebonden productie van deze uiterst vervuilende olie- en gaswinning….) 

Volgens Mike Whitney, de schrijver van het hieronder opgenomen artikel zou Putin de olieprijs op minstens $ 45.– per vat willen houden, echter daarmee zou Putin in de eigen voet schieten, immers zo wordt de zwaar gesubsidieerde schalie-olie en gaswinning in de VS weer enigszins lucratief. (en reken maar dat Rusland als Saoedi-Arabië de hele schalie-olie winning in de VS plat zou willen leggen…)    

Het
volgende artikel werd zoals gezegd geschreven door Mike Whitney en door mij
overgenomen van Information Clearing House, onder het artikel
kan je klikken voor een ‘Dutch’ vertaling, dit neemt wel enige tijd
in beslag:

The
Russia-Saudi Oil-Price War Is a Fraud and a Farce

By
Mike Whitney

April 16,
2020 “
Information
Clearing House

 
The Russia-Saudi oil-price war is a fabrication concocted by the
media. There’s not a word of truth to any of it. Yes, there was a
dust up at an OPEC meeting in early March that led to production
increases and plunging prices. That part is true. But Saudi Arabia’s
oil-dumping strategy wasn’t aimed at Russia, it was aimed at US
shale oil producers. But not for the reasons you’ve read about in
the media.

The
Saudis aren’t trying to destroy the US shale oil business. That’s
another fiction. They just want US producers to play by the rules and
pitch in when prices need support. That might seem like a stretch,
but it’s true.

You
see, US oil producers are not what-you’d-call “team players”.
They don’t cooperate with foreign producers, they’re not willing
to share the costs of flagging demand, and they never lift a finger
to support prices. US oil producers are the next-door-neighbor that
parks his beat-up Plymouth on the front lawn and then surrounds it
with rusty appliances. They don’t care about anyone but themselves.

What
Putin and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman want is for US
producers to share the pain of oil production cuts in order to
stabilize prices.

It’s an entirely reasonable request. Here’s a clip from an
article at oilprice.com that helps to explain what’s really going
on:

“… there was a sliver
of hope that oil prices may rebound after Reuters reported that Saudi
Arabia, Russia and allied oil producers will agree to deep cuts to
their crude output at talks this week
but
only if the United States and several others join in with curbs to
help prop up prices that have been hammered by the coronavirus
crisis. However, in an attempt to have its cake and eat it too, the
U.S. DOE said on Tuesday that U.S. output is already falling without
government action, in line with the White House’s insistence that
it would not intervene in the private markets….

OPEC+ will
require the United States to make cuts in order to come to an
agreement:

The EIA report today demonstrates that there are already projected
cuts of 2 (million bpd), without any intervention from the federal
government,” the U.S. Energy Department said.

That is not enough for
OPEC+ however, and certainly not
Russia,
which on Wednesday made clear that market-driven declines in oil
production shouldn’t be considered as cuts

intended to stabilize the market, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov
tells reporters on conference call.

These are completely
different cuts. You are comparing the overall demand drop with cuts
to stabilize global markets. It’s like comparing length and width,”
Peskov said…..Moscow’s participation is highly contingent on the
US, and is unlikely to agree to output cuts if the US does not join
the effort.” (“Historic Oil Deal On The Verge Of Collapse As
Russia Balks At U.S. ‘Cuts’”, oilprice.com)

 

Putin
is being reasonable and fair. If everyone else is forced to cut
supply, then US oil producers should have to cut supply too. But they
don’t want to share the pain, so they’ve settled on a strategy
for weaseling out of it. They want their reductions in output (from
weak demand during the pandemic) to count as “production cuts”.
They even have a name for this swindle, they call it “organic
production cuts”, which means no cuts at all. This is the way
hucksters do business not responsible adults.

What
does Putin want from this deal?

Price
stability. Yes, he’d like to see prices settle somewhere north of
$45 per barrel but that’s not going to happen for a while. The
combination of a weaker demand (due to the coronavirus) and
oversupply (from the Saudis flooding the market) have ensured that
prices will remain low for the foreseeable future. Even so, Putin
understood what the Saudis were doing by flooding the market, and he
knew it wasn’t directed at Russia.
The
Saudis were trying to persuade US oil producers to stop freeloading
and cut production like everyone else.

That’s the long and short of it. Check out this excerpt from an
article by oil expert, Simon Watkins at oilprice.com:

Saudi Arabia
was continually peeved …(because)

its efforts to keep oil prices up through various OPEC and OPEC+
agreements were allowing these very shale producers to make a lot
more money than the Saudis, relatively speaking. The reason for this
was that
U.S.
shale producers…. were not bound in to the OPEC/OPEC+ production
quotas so could fill the output gaps created by OPEC producers.

(“The Sad Truth About The OPEC+ Production Cut”, Simon Watkins,
oilprice.com) 

 

This
is what the media fails to tell their readers, that US oil producers–
who don’t participate in any collective effort to stabilize prices–
have been exploiting OPEC production quotas in order to fatten the
bottom line at the expense of others.
US
producers figured out how to game the system and make a bundle in the
process.

Is it any wonder why the Saudis were pissed?? Here’s more from the
same article:

This allowed the U.S.
a rolling 3-4 million bpd advantage over Saudi in the oil exports
game, meaning that it quickly became the world’s number one oil
producer…. Hence, Saudi Arabia decided initially to unilaterally
announce its intention for the last OPEC+ deal to be much bigger than
that which it had pre-agreed with Russia, hoping to ambush the
Russians into agreeing. Russia, however, turned around and told Saudi
Arabia to figuratively go and reproduce with itself. MbS,… then
decided to launch an all-out price war.” (oilprice.com)

So
you can see that this really had nothing to do with Russian at all.
The Crown Prince was simply frustrated at the way US oil producers
were gaming the system, which is why he felt like he had to respond
by flooding the market.

The obvious target was the US shale oil industry that was taking
advantage of the quotas, refusing to cooperate with fellow oil
producers and generally freeloading off the existing quota system.

And
what’s funny, is that as soon as the Saudis started putting the
screws to the US fracking gang, they all scampered off to Washington
en masse to beg for help from Papa Trump. Which is why Trump decided
to make emergency calls to Moscow and Riyadh to see if he could hash
out a deal.

It’s
worth noting that domestic oil producers have been involved in other
dodgy activities in the past. Check out this excerpt from an article
in the Guardian in 2014, the last time oil prices crashed:

After standing at well
over $110 a barrel in the summer, the cost of crude has collapsed.
Prices are down by a quarter in the past three months….

Think about how the Obama
administration sees the state of the world. It wants Tehran to come
to heel over its nuclear programme. It wants Vladimir Putin to back
off in eastern Ukraine. But after recent experiences in Iraq and
Afghanistan, the White House has no desire to put American boots on
the ground.
Instead,
with the help of its Saudi ally, Washington is trying to drive down
the oil price by flooding an already weak market with crude. As the
Russians and the Iranians are heavily dependent on oil exports, the
assumption is that they will become easier to deal with

The Saudis did something
similar in the mid-1980s. Then, the geopolitical motivation for a
move that sent the oil price to below $10 a barrel was to destabilize
Saddam Hussein’s regime….

Washington’s
willingness to play the oil card stems from the belief that domestic
supplies of energy from fracking make it possible for the US to
become the world’s biggest oil producer
.
In a speech last year, Tom Donilon, then Barack Obama’s national
security adviser, said the US was now less vulnerable to global oil
shocks. The cushion provided by shale oil and gas “affords us a
stronger hand in pursuing and implementing our national security
goals”. (“Stakes are high as US plays the oil card against Iran
and Russia”, The Guardian) 

 

This
excerpt shows that Washington is more than willing to use the “oil
card” if it helps to achieve its geopolitical objectives. Not
surprisingly, good buddy, Saudi Arabia, has historically played a key
role in helping to promote those goals. The current incident,
however, is the exact opposite. The Saudis aren’t helping the US
achieve its objectives, quite the contrary, they’re lashing out in
frustration. They feel like they’re being squeezed by Washington
(and US producers) and they want to prove that they have the means to
fight back. Flooding the market was just MBS’s way of “letting
off steam”.

Trump
understands this, but he also understands who ultimately calls the
shots, which is why he took the unusual step of explicitly warning
the Saudis that they’d better shape up and step in line or there’d
be hell to pay. Here’s a little background that will help to
connect the dots:

..the deal made in
1945 between the U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Saudi
King at the time, Abdulaziz, that has defined the relationship
between the two countries ever since…
the
deal that was struck

between the two men on board the U.S. Navy cruiser Quincy… was
that
the U.S. would receive all of the oil supplies it needed for as long
as Saudi Arabia had oil in place, in return for which the U.S. would
guarantee the security of the ruling House of Saud.
The
deal has altered slightly ever since the rise of the U.S. shale oil
industry

and Saudi Arabia’s attempt to destroy it from 2014 to 2016, in that
the U.S. still guarantees the security of the House of Saud but
it
also expects Saudi Arabia not only to supply the U.S. with whatever
oil it needs for as long as it can but also – and this is key to
everything that has followed – it also allows the U.S. shale
industry to continue to function and to grow.

As far as the U.S. is
concerned, if t
his
means that the Saudis lose out to U.S. shale producers by keeping oil
prices up but losing out on export opportunities to these U.S. firms
then tough..

 

As U.S. President Donald
Trump has made clear whenever he has sensed a lack of understanding
on the part of Saudi Arabia for the huge benefit that the U.S. is
doing the ruling family:
“He
[Saudi King Salman] would not last in power for two weeks without the
backing of the U.S. military.

(“The Sad Truth About The OPEC+ Production Cut”, Simon Watkins,
Oil Price) 

 

Trump
felt like he had to remind the Saudis how the system actually works:
Washington gives the orders and the Saudi’s obey. Simple, right? In
fact, the Crown Prince has already slashed oil production
dramatically and is fully complying with Trump’s directives,
because he knows if he doesn’t, he’s going to wind up like Saddam
Hussein or Muammar Gaddafi.

Meanwhile,
US shale oil producers won’t be required to make any cuts at all
or, as the New York Times puts it: “It was not immediately clear if
the Trump administration made a formal commitment to cut production
in the United States.”

Got
that? So everyone else cuts production, everyone else sees their
revenues shrink, and everyone else pitches-in to put a floor under
prices. Everyone except the “exceptional” American oil producers
from the exceptional United States. They don’t have to do a damn
thing.

Mike
lives in Washington state.  He can be reached
at fergiewhitney@msn.com.
– “Source

Click
for

Spanish,
German,
Dutch,
Danish,
French,
translation- Note-
Translation
may take a moment to load.

Hennis-Plasschaert speelt de vermoorde onschuld in Irak

Vanmorgen in het Radio1 nieuws van 9.30 u. letterlijk het volgende bericht: ‘Hennis-Plasschaert roept de autoriteiten in Irak op ‘vreedzame betogingen’ niet met geweld te onderdrukken en ze heeft de Irakezen opgeroepen de situatie in het land te verbeteren door weerstand te bieden aan corruptie en buitenlandse bemoeienis…….’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Waar haalt Hennis-Plasschaert (‘speciaal VN gezand voor Irak) het gore lef vandaan? De meeste ‘betogingen’ in Irak zijn allesbehalve vreedzaam en te danken aan corruptie die de westerse bedrijven in Irak goed uitkomt……. (het gaat vooral om bedrijven uit de VS)

Bovendien is e.e.a. het gevolg van de illegale oorlog die de VS volkomen gebaseerd op leugens in 2003 tegen het land begon, een oorlog die in feite nog steeds niet is afgelopen en die intussen aan meer dan 2 miljoen Irakezen het leven heeft gekost, ofwel die zijn vermoord (massamoord) door de VS met hulp van een aantal NAVO-partners, waaronder Nederland….. Over ‘buitenlandse bemoeienis’ gesproken!!

Voorts heeft de VS in haar eigen duivelsstaart gebeten, door die illegale oorlog, immers de sjiieten waren al decennialang de onderdrukte meerderheid in Irak en met de val van het soennitische bewind van Saddam Hoessein kreeg deze meerderheid verreweg de overhand, wat ervoor zorgde dat Irak eindelijk vriendschapsbanden kon aangaan met Iran, dat gvd door de VS wordt beschuldigd van ‘invloed uitbreiding……’ Dezelfde VS met meer dan 800 militaire bases over de wereld; hoe bedoelt u ‘invloed uitbreiding en het verstoren van de stabiliteit’, wat de VS er altijd achter aanplakt….. Als er één land is wat instabiliteit brengt in het Midden-Oosten (en een groot deel van de rest van de wereld) en dat wereldwijd veel te veel invloed heeft, is het de VS wel!!!

Hennis-Plasschaert moet zich de oren van de kop schamen, wat denkt ze wel, lid van een partij die volmondig achter alle illegale oorlogen van de VS stond en nog staat, waardoor deze partij is gedrenkt in het bloed van onschuldigen……. 

Knettergek!!

Bolivia: misdadigers die vechten voor het kapitalisme

Kathleen
Wallace schreef op
CounterPunch een artikel over Bolivia waarbij
ze o.a. de woorden gebruikt van VS marinier Smedley Butler, die
tijdens zijn leven onder meer vocht in WOI en de Mexicaanse
revolutie. Deze marinier stelde later over zijn werk dat hij in feite
als misdadiger het werk opknapte voor het kapitalisme. Hij prikte de
leugens door die de VS, het bedrijfsleven en de financiële wereld gebruikten om staatsgrepen te plegen en oorlogen te voeren, leugens
waarmee het volk van de VS werd belazerd om zo algehele goedkeuring
te krijgen voor het vuile, bloedige buitenlandbeleid van de VS…… 

Wallece
stelt terecht dat Bolivia het laatste slachtoffer is van het smerige
kapitalistische spel van de VS zoals Smedley dat zag, al is
tegenwoordig de term neoliberalisme meer gebruikt, daar dit in feite
nog een paar stappen verder gaat dan het vermaledijde
kapitalisme…….

Khadaffi
en Hoessein worden genoemd als slachtoffer van het buitenlandbeleid
van de VS, echter er zijn nog veel meer voorbeelden te bedenken en
telkens blijkt dat de heersers en regeringen tegen wie de VS het
opneemt, de belangen van de grote bedrijven en/of de
militair-strategische belangen van de VS schenden, dan wel op grote voorraden belangrijke grondstoffen zitten, zoals olie en gas….* Zo zou
Morales nog maar onlangs een contract met een Duitse firma hebben
opgezegd, een contract over delving en export van lithium, een
belangrijke grondstof voor accu’s in de breedste zin van het woord,
dus zowel voor auto’s als die voor de smartphone…… Bolivia zou in haar bodem rond de 70% van de totale wereldvoorraad aan lithium bezitten…… In feite nationaliseerde Morales de voorraden lithium
en nationalisatie is een woord waardoor in Washington alle seinen op knalrood gaan…….

Gegarandeerd
dat de VS als eerste de opstand in Bolivia heeft georganiseerd en
geregisseerd, dit met de opzet een staatsgreep te forceren, wat zoals we weten is gelukt…… (een manier van handelen die de VS al vaak heeft gebruikt…..) Zeker ook
dat de VS contact had met de oppositie (van de minderheid, dus de
nazaten van de kolonisten) en dat deze oppositie besprekingen voerde
met de CIA, onderwerp: het afzetten van Morales……**

NOVEMBER
15, 2019

A
Gangster for Capitalism: Next Up, Bolivia

by KATHLEEN
WALLACE

Drawing
by Nathaniel St. Clair

War
is a racket. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the
expense of the masses.”

This
sounds like a modern day comment from the US far left, but the source
is hardly that. It’s from a man who was the most decorated Marine
ever at the time of his death. He was an expert on the topic. He
served in WW I as well as the Mexican Revolution. Smedley Butler was
doomed to be a largely forgotten voice in the rush to gloss over the
true causes of war and regime change. He pointed out the techniques
used to win public approval and the subsequent serving of the
corporate needs by entering these ever-repeating violent conflicts.
He described his military career as that of “a high class muscleman
for Big Business, Wall Street, and the Bankers. In short, I was a
racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.”

This
man mapped it all out for us around a hundred years ago, yet the
jingoism prevails. The latest bipolar foreign policy evidenced in
Bolivia is just the latest chapter of the US pushing for and actively
installing those who would further the interests of Big Business.
Always at the cost of the poor. In this case, the cure for the
bipolar policy is probably going to be lithium.

The
moment that leaders begin to step out of a corporate-friendly lane,
shit gets real. Fast. A treasured ally becomes the perpetrator of
election fraud or the nexus of humanitarian affronts to their people.
True, pretty much anyone who ascends to a leadership position has
issues that can be dissected and critiqued, but even the most
horrible actions can be quietly dismissed as quickly as a bone saw
can dispatch a pudgy journalist to pieces—if you play the game.
Amazing and graphic affronts to decency are ignored when the leaders
keep the machinery oiled. Literally oiled.

Gaddafi
was a bit of a back and forth US darling until he flirted too much
with a gold-based dinar currency aimed at competing with the
petrodollar. But things are much better now that he was murdered in
the open-air and now Libya can be an open-air slave market. “We
came, we saw, he died.” Hilarious***. Now those that took over have
some very easily refinable oil, if not refined manners.

Saddam
Hussein was a similar friend to the US, even an ally– his behavior
during the war with Iran was considered nifty. I don’t recall the
US going in when he gassed the Kurds either. Maybe someone in DC
frowned? Those Kurds sure don’t ever get a fair deal, do they? I
can understand why they only trust mountains. And the moves that
seemed to be regime threatening in Iraq involved that pesky
petrodollar again.

I
guess we’ve moved to a greener foreign policy when lithium regime
change is replacing petroleum regime change. Thank you green economy.

Didn’t
Morales recently step out of a joint deal  with a German firm to
export lithium (which Bolivia claims to have over 70% of the world’s
reserves)?  I think he did that like a second before he was
discarded. Nationalized resources are not okay and the global south
is supposed to be a poverty-stricken supplier. Teslas are for
well-heeled Northern Californians, not Bolivians wearing those bowler
hats! Ridiculous.

And
all through the meddling, as well as the overt actions that cause
increased misery in the world, the US public largely continues to
believe in it all. The examples are all around us.

Something
I noticed recently: This Veteran’s Day a spot on PBS spoke to
issues of Native American participation in the military. The slant
was broadly complimentary to military service (duh, of course it was
on V-Day), but it was perhaps one of the worst widespread examples of
Stockholm Syndrome I’ve seen. They were glorifying the sacrifices
made by Natives in serving the US government, taking these dignified
and proud individuals and supplanting the US Imperialism on the young
people who had signed up. Don’t get me wrong, the tribal members
were totally having it, deriving enormous self-worth from the
experience. Even at the expense of PTSD and lost family members. It
was a mind-fuck for sure. I worked on the White Mountain Apache
reservation long ago and saw the manipulation first-hand–the desire
many had to fit into the broader culture that had back-stabbed them
and their ancestors. The end of the piece did a bit on individuals
fighting against fracking and made mention that Standing Rock didn’t
stop the pipeline, that the government prevailed, but it was framed
like this was part of a personal journey for the veterans.  I
would say this was an example of a warrior culture using that power
to try to protect something sacred, the environment—to battle for
something that matters, not being hijacked to go kill ________
(insert poor people of choice in latest military misadventure). It
was a confused piece, made to tug at the heartstrings. Clearly you
can be a minority in this country if you are a useful part of the
machine is what I got out of it. This is how consent is manufactured,
of course. You are revered if you do what you are supposed to do in
that it helps the business of business. They get control of resources
and you might get a body bag, but they will frame it as beautiful
sacrifice and those of us who aren’t buying it are the ogres who
hate rainbows,sunshine and motherhood. And this is just one small
arena of propaganda.

The
corporate agenda will continue to be pushed and despite all evidence,
the average American won’t wonder why one ally can perpetrate
horrific acts and another gets cast out for Trumped up reasons. Hell,
most people are so tired they can’t think straight, let alone think
critically.

Bolivia
had a record of success in lifting many out of poverty and
illiteracy. This will certainly go the other direction now that
Jeanine Añez is at the helm. She seems to be quite adversarial to
the indigenous, and they comprise 65% of Bolivia’s population. She
has the saccharine hucksterism of a 40’s bible salesman. Definitely
Trump ally material, maybe even Trump wife material?

Much
like the scientific process strives to look towards the truth of how
things really work, Smedley Butler gave us a framework that should be
taken seriously—he described correctly how it all works and how
these similar situations keep producing repeatable miserable results
that keep the world in line for business extraction. He was a
principled man who deserves to be remembered—his prescient warning
regarding additional regime meddling and outright war have not lost
the luster of truth. It’s going on as we speak.

Join
the debate on Facebook

More
articles by:
KATHLEEN
WALLACE

Kathleen
Wallace
 writes
out of the US Midwest.

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

*  Zie:

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


 ‘VS vermoordde meer dan 20 miljoen mensen sinds het einde van WOII……..‘ Tot het jaar 2000, waar deze eeuw intussen al meer dan 2,5 miljoen moorden aan toe zijn te voegen, moorden begaan door de VS en de NAVO (deze terreurorganisatie stond en staat onder militair opperbevel stond de VS, de grootste terreurentiteit op aarde…)….


List of wars involving the United States


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


VS commando’s vechten o.a. in Midden- en Zuid-Amerika, aldus het VS ministerie van oorlog………


De war on drugs is veel dodelijker dan over het algemeen gedacht


** Zie: 

Bolivia: bewijs op tafel dat VS aanstuurt op een coup

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

*** Dat zei hare kwaadaardigheid en oorlogsmisdadiger Hillary Clinton achteraf over de in feite door haar bij elkaar gehitste oorlog tegen Libië, waar dit land onder Khadaffi het rijkste land was van Afrika, waar man en vrouw gelijk waren en waar praktisch alles gratis was, zelfs studeren in het buitenland (inclusief een toelage om de huur te betalen en in het levensonderhoud te voorzien) en dat voor jongens en meisjes…. Na het ingrijpen van de VS en haar oorlogshond NAVO, is Libië één grote chaos en bijna het armste land van Afrika, waar het de bewoners aan alles ontbreekt en waar de vrouw terug is achter het aanrecht (meisjes mogen zelfs niet meer naar school…)…… ‘Leve de westerse terreur!!’

Zie ook:

Bolivia: OAS heeft gelogen over verkiezingen: Evo Morales onterecht afgezet middels staatsgreep!

Bolivia: de coup heeft alles te maken met grondstoffen

NOS liegt weer over Evo Morales (Boliviaanse president) die met coup werd afgezet


Bolivia coup een ‘CIA job’, aldus anonieme Duitse veiligheidsanalist, met lessen voor de toekomst


Bolivia: misdadigers die vechten voor het kapitalisme


NOS met fake news over Bolivia


Bolivianen eisen hun president terug


Bolivia: staatsgreep maakt eind aan succesvol presidentschap Evo Morales

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

Bolivia Closes 2018 Among The Highest Economic Growth Rates

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


NAVO gaat VS helpen in Zuid-Amerika terreur uit te oefenen: Colombia lid van de NAVO……..


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

Halliburton en Chevron hebben groot belang bij ‘regime change’ in Venezuela‘ (zie de links in dat bericht naar meer artikelen over Venezuela)


9 ‘ex-FARC rebellen’ vermoord door leger Colombia: FARC-EP opgericht


Mensenrechten- en milieuactivisten worden massaal vermoord in Brazilië en Colombia, waar het laatste land NAVO bases heeft…….


Koenders heeft vrijlating gegijzelde Spoorloos makers in Colombia bewerkstelligt……. AUW!!!


Paus Franciscus in Colombia om vrede te prediken……


People of Brazil: my sincere condolences with ‘your’ fascistic, psychopathic president Bolsonaro……


VS commando’s vechten o.a. in Midden- en Zuid-Amerika, aldus het VS ministerie van oorlog………


NAVO naar Zuid-Amerika? Weg met dit agressieve, terroristische bondgenootschap, NU!!!


Bolton geeft toe dat de VS een fascistisch beleid voert……


Bolsonaro, de fascistische nieuwe president van Brazilië, werd volgens Avaaz en fake news brengers als de NYT gekozen door manipulatie via WhatsApp


Bolsonaro wint Braziliaanse verkiezingen >> weer zijn we een fascistisch geleid land ‘rijker…’


Braziliaanse verkiezingen: democratie versus (neo-) fascisme, ook een groot gevaar in Europa


Katy Sherriff (Radio1 correspondent Z-Amerika) brandt socialistische partij Brazilië af……

VS bewapening van Irak met chemische en biologische wapens valt onder leeftijdscensuur van YouTube

Al weer
enige tijd geleden bracht Brassscheck TV de hieronder opgenomen video met
bijgaande tekst. Het handelt hier om het voorzien van Irak onder
Saddam Hoessein van biologische en chemische wapens door de VS (
in de 80er jaren van de vorige eeuw)…….

Blijkbaar
vindt YouTube dat dit soort informatie niet geschikt is voor zelfs
tieners, ofwel men mag de vuile VS geschiedenis niet kennen, anders
gezegd leeftijdcensuur >> veronderstel dat je met dergelijke informatie weer zo’n hippiebeweging als in de 60er jaren van de vorige eeuw kweekt, een generatie die zich verzet tegen de continue illegale oorlogsvoering
door de VS……

Vergeet
voorts niet dat ook Nederland een ‘mooie rol’ speelt in het leveren van gifgas aan het regime Hoessein……… Bolkestein, destijds VVD minister van
BuZa, gaf tegen het advies van ambtenaren en deskundigen in, van Anraat
toestemming enorme hoeveelheden grondstoffen voor het fabriceren van gifgas te leveren aan Irak, ofwel Bolkestein gaf exportvergunningen voor onderdelen van chemische wapens……. 


Van Anraat werd
veroordeeld voor het leveren van onderdelen waarmee gifgas werd gemaakt en VVD oorlogsmisdadiger Bolkestein, de ploert die tegen alle adviezen in daarvoor een exportvergunning afgaf, gedraagt zich nog
even arrogant als destijds, werkt al jaren o.a. als parlementariër in Brussel
en dat tegen een onbeschoft hoog salaris…….


‘Terug naar de VS’: bij de eerste illegale oorlog van de VS tegen Irak, hebben VS militairen in Irak de eerder door de VS geleverde voorraden gifgas verzameld en het land uitgebracht, dit om de sporen van deze enorme misdaad te wissen……


Met dat gifgas heeft het bewind Hoessein een enorm aantal Koerden en Iraniërs vermoord (in de Eerste Golfoorlog, een oorlog van Irak tegen Iran), wat betreft de Iraniërs de zoveelste enorme misdaad van de VS tegen dat volk, immers de VS wilde destijds maar wat graag dat Hoessein Iran aan zou vallen, vandaar ook de leveringen van gifgas (door de VS)……


Leeftijdscensuur is in feite een vorm van geschiedvervalsing, dit daar het overgrote deel van de jongeren die deze informatie niet te zien krijgt, blijft geloven dat hun overheid ethisch en moreel verantwoord handelt, terwijl de overheid in de VS bijvoorbeeld sinds het begin van deze eeuw al meer dan 2,5 miljoen mensen heeft vermoord……. Verder steunt de VS dictatoriale regimes als Saoedi-Arabië, als het moet zelfs bij het uitvoeren van een genocide, zoals nu daadwerkelijk het geval is in Jemen….. 


In feite kan je e.e.a. ook nog in verband brengen met Julian Assange, die door de Britse politie werd ontvoert uit de ambassade van Ecuador en nu in gijzeling is genomen door de Britten…. Immers met de informatie op WikiLeaks werd en wordt pas goed duidelijk gemaakt hoe smerig de buitenlandpolitiek van de VS was en is….

Zie de
video en geeft het door!!

HISTORY
– BANNED BY YOUTUBE

HOW
THE US ARMED IRAQ WITH CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS

“DANGEROUS
INFORMATION”


YouTube
informed us that due to “community standards” they are putting
“age restrictions” on the viewing of this video.

What’s
it about?

It’s
the story of how the US armed Iraq with chemical and biological
weapons, used US troops to dispose of them during the first invasion,
and then sat back denying that the serious illnesses that resulted
were caused by these operations.

The
primary qualifications of Colin Powell and Norman Schwarzkopf: The
ability and willingness to lie with a straight face – over and over
and over again.

Missing
from this report: What corporations were involved in the manufacture
of and profited from the covert US program to arm Iraq with chemical
and biological weapons.

YouTube’s
message to us:

Your
video The US armed Iraq with bio and chemical weapons was flagged to
us for review. Upon review, we’ve determined that it may not be
suitable for all viewers and it has been placed behind an age
restriction.”

Click
here to
 support
Brasscheck

Zie ook:

BBC weer met anti-Syrische propaganda en veel aandacht voor de geweldige Turken en hun leider Erdogan‘ (met links naar meer berichten over gifgasgebruik en andere ellende in Syrië)

Rutte (VVD ‘premier’), VVD was te links: we moeten ‘het fatsoenlijke Bolkestein beleid’ volgen….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Vanmorgen hoorde ik op Radio1 na 9.00 u., in het megasuffe programma ‘MAX Weekend’ een audiofragment met Rutte.

Hierin stelde deze VVD oplichter dat de VVD in het begin van deze eeuw te links was….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Benieuwd wat Rutte dan onder extreem rechts verstaat! Volgens Rutte is de PVV in dat gat gestapt, waar hij de LPF uiteraard als eerste had moeten noemen.

Volgens Rutte dekte VVD oorlogsmisdadiger Frits ‘gifgas’ Bolkestein dit gat eerder, het gat dat zich tussen centrum en ‘fatsoenlijk rechts’ bevindt…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Bolkestein, de hufter die tegen de adviezen van deskundigen in, als minister in de 80er jaren, een exportvergunning afgaf voor enorme hoeveelheden kunstmest* aan Irak, waarmee het regime Hoessein gifgas maakte en een groot aantal Koerden ‘uiterst fatsoenlijk’ uitmoordde…… Let wel: juist daarvoor werd Bolkestein gewaarschuwd…… Van Anraat die het spul aan Irak leverde kreeg daarvoor een gevangenisstraf opgelegd, echter Bolkestein werd niet eens terecht gewezen…….

Dezelfde Bolkestein van de ‘fatsoenlijke’ Bolkestein richtlijn, een richtlijn waarmee jarenlang Oost-Europese werknemers werden uitgebuit en EU vakkrachten uit het westen hun baan verloren door het onbeschofte lage salaris dat men aan Oost-Europeanen mocht uitbetalen…..

De VVD is nooit een fatsoenlijke partij geweest, sterker nog: de VVD is een misdadigers partij, zo blijkt keer op keer uit berichten in de media en uit de rechtszaken die werden gevoerd tegen politici van deze smeerpijpenpartij….. (moet zeggen dat het me meevalt dat er de laatste maanden niet nieuwe VVD politici aan de paal zijn genageld voor corruptie en/of andere soorten van fraude)

Wat de grijnzende hufter Rutte eigenlijk bedoelde is het feit dat zijn partij niet fascistoïde genoeg was en dat met dit gegeven partijen als LPF, PVV en FVD in dat gat stapten…….

Rutte liet nog even weten dat hij nooit met de PVV zal samenwerken….. ha! ha! ha! ha! De volksverlakker! Hij zei dit alleen daar de PVV fiks heeft moeten inleveren met de Statenverkiezingen…… Het is gezien het pleidooi van Rutte dan ook duidelijk dat hij met Baudet van Forum voor Democratie (FVD) wil samenwerken, het FVD, de jongste fascistische partij van Nederland……

Het FVD, een partij die bovendien tegen maatregelen is, die de klimaatverandering nog enigszins afremmen, liever laten de VVD en FVD mensen sterven door de luchtvervuiling geproduceerd door autoverkeer…… (jaarlijks overlijden rond de 18.000 mensen aan de gevolgen van langdurige auto-uitstoot inademing, daarnaast loopt een groot aantal kinderen long- en/of luchtwegklachten op door die uitstoot)

Logisch dus dat Rutte wel met het FVD wil regeren, immers in woord is hij voor maatregelen tegen de verdere temperatuurstijging van het klimaat, maar voor echt handelen laat hij dit onderwerp keer op keer liggen…… Zijn belofte de uitstoot van bedrijven te gaan belasten, zijn nu al ver over de datum, immers de verkiezingen zijn voorbij en nu kan hij dat bedrijfsleven ‘verstandig belasten…’, ofwel het bedrijven zo min mogelijk laten betalen en daarna het betaalde geld terugsluizen naar dat bedrijfsleven; moet je als particulier voor komen…..

‘Fatsoenlijk rechts’, lees: ijskoud, inhumaan neoliberalisme, dat qua voorkomen meer lijkt op fascisme en waarmee men het volk keer op keer belazert!!

* Het ging destijds om veel meer kunstmest dan Irak in vele jaren voor haar landbouw zou kunnen gebruiken, zelfs al zou die landbouw toentertijd 3 keer zo groot zijn geweest en ondanks dat feit tekende Bolkestein de exportvergunning toch……. Een oorlogsmisdaad van formaat!!!

Zie ook:

Job Cohen (PvdA) maakt zich hypocriet druk om Nederlanders die niet gehoord worden >> verkiezingscampagne 2021 van start

Kasja Ollongren (D66 minister) en de Russische manipulatie van de Provinciale Statenverkiezingen

Verkiezingsuitslag: FVD grote winnaar >> Nederlander gemiddeld dommer en meer fascistisch

Statenverkiezingen: ben je huurder? Stem dan niet op de VVD, het CDA, D66, PvdA, GroenLinks, PVV, FVD, ChristenUnie en SGP!

Statenverkiezingen: Jesse Klaver wil graag samenwerken met D66

Thierry Baudet (FVD) ging ook na de terreuraanslag gisteren door met verkiezingscampagne

‘Klimaatakkoord’ >> Stientje van Veldhoven (D66 staatssecretaris) lult zich weer eens ‘groen’ en verdedigt het niet extra belasten van benzine auto’s……‘ en in het verlengde van dat bericht: ”Klimaatakkoord en Rutte’s belofte over de CO2 heffing >> Kees Boonman geeft toe veel te verzinnen‘ en: ‘Klimaatakkoord doorrekening uh verrekening laat zien dat de doelen niet gehaald zullen worden >> het grote belazeren‘ plus: ‘Klimaatakkoord >> Rutte: er komt ‘een verstandige CO2 heffing’ voor bedrijven…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Jan Paternotte (D66 Tweede Kamer): wil stop op groei Eindhoven en Rotterdam Airport

Kees Boonman (‘politiek commentator’) zwetst door en steekt Rutte terloops een veer in de vieze bips

Bram van Ojik, de Trump van ‘GroenLinks’, wenst geen zaken te doen met Huawei…… OEI!!!

Stephen Colbert probeerde zonder enige humor Tulsi Gabbard in het rechtse kamp te drukken n.a.v. de illegale VS oorlog tegen Syrië

De show
van Stephen Colbert is een propaganda orgaan voor de rechtse
democraten en is dat in feite al heel lang. Daarmee staat Colbert ook achter de
illegale oorlogen die onder de democratische ‘vredesduif’ Obama werden aangegaan, dit onder regie van zijn rechterhand destijds Hillary Clinton
(minister van BuZa), een oorlogsmisdadiger van formaat…..

Colbert
had onlangs de democraat Tulsi Gabbard in zijn show en in
tegenstelling tot de omgang met andere politici van de Democratische Partij,
was dit geen gesprek met opgeklopte ‘humor’.

Colbert
probeerde Gabbard zelfs in het kamp te duwen van fascist David Duke
(voormalig Ku Klux Klan top), en dat van rechtse rotzakken als Steve Bannon en Matt
Gaetz……

Wat
betreft de illegale oorlogen van de VS, liet Colbert ten overvloede in zijn gesprek
met Gabbard blijken dat hij die volledig steunt, ondanks het enorme
aantal doden en landen die in puin achterblijven als de VS klaar is
met haar grootschalige terreur tegen in feite de bevolking van de
landen die het illegaal aanvalt…..

Ook de illegale oorlog van de VS tegen het bewind van Assad kwam ter sprake, waar Gabbard Colbert fijntjes liet weten dat de CIA in 2011 de ‘opstand’ tegen Assad heeft georganiseerd en geregisseerd en dat de oorlog van de VS in dat land niet gericht was tegen IS, maar tegen het bewind van Assad, waar ze ook de wapenleveringen aan terreurgroepen als IS en militaire training door de VS aan die terreurgroepen noemde….. 

Jammer dat ze Assad wel een dictator noemt, terwijl hij met grote meerderheid democratisch tot president werd verkozen in 2014, een verkiezing die door internationale waarnemers als eerlijk en goed werd beoordeeld…… 

Vergeet voorts niet dat onder Assad alle geloven hand in hand naast elkaar leefden, een zaak die door handelingen van de VS bijna de nek werd omgedraaid…. Gelukkig leven de teruggekeerde vluchtelingen, in de gebieden die door het reguliere Syrische leger worden gecontroleerd, weer vreedzaam naast elkaar, ongeacht het geloof dat men aanhangt……

Helaas
voor Colbert, maar hij is geen partij voor Gabbard die hem flink bij
de lurven had >> lezen en zien mensen!!

Colbert
Smears Tulsi Gabbard To Her Face While Telling Zero Jokes

by Caitlin
Johnstone

Hawaii
Congresswoman and Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi
Gabbard 
recently
appeared
 on The
Late Show with Stephen Colbert
,
where instead of the light, jokey banter about politics and who she
is as a person that Democratic presidential candidates normally
encounter on late night comedy programs, the show’s host solemnly ran
down a list of textbook beltway smears against Gabbard and made her
defend them in front of his audience.

Normally
when a Democratic Party-aligned politician appears on such a show,
you can expect jokes about how stupid Trump is and how badly they’re
going to beat the Republicans, how they’re going to help ordinary
Americans, and maybe some friendly back-and-forth about where they
grew up or something. Colbert had no time to waste on such things,
however, because this was not an interview with a normal Democratic
Party-aligned politician: this was a politician who has been loudly
and consistently criticizing US foreign policy.

After
briefly asking his guest who she is and why she’s running for
president, Colbert 
jumped
right into it
 by
immediately bringing up Syria and Assad, the primary line of attack
employed against Gabbard by establishment propagandists in American
mainstream media.

Colbert:
Do you think the Iraq war was worth it?

Gabbard:
No.

Colbert:
Do you think that our involvement in Syria has been worth it?

Gabbard:
No.

Colbert:
Do you think that ISIS could have been defeated without our
involvement and without our support of the local troops there?

Gabbard:
There are two things we need to address in Syria. One is a regime
change war that was first launched by the United States in 2011,
covertly, led by the CIA. That is a regime change war that has
continued over the years, that has increased the suffering of the
Syrian people, and strengthened groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS,
because the CIA was using American taxpayer dollars to provide arms
and training and equipment to these terrorist groups to get them to
overthrow the government. So that is a regime change war that we
should not have been engaging.

Colbert:
So, but if it is someone like Bashar al-Assad, who gasses his own
people, or who engages in war crimes against his own people, should
the United States not be involved?

Gabbard:
The United States should not be intervening to overthrow these
dictators and these regimes that we don’t like, like Assad, like
Saddam Hussein, like Gaddafi, and like Kim Jong Un. There are bad
people in the world, but history has shown us that every time the
United States goes in and topples these dictators we don’t like,
trying to end up like the world’s police, we end up increasing the
suffering of the people in these countries. We end up increasing the
loss of life, but American lives and the lives of people in these
countries. We end up undermining our own security, what to speak of
the trillions of dollars of taxpayer money that’s spent on these wars
that we need to be using right here at home.

Like
I said, this is not a normal presidential candidate. How often do you
see a guest appear on a network late night talk show and talk about
the CIA arming terrorists in Syria and the fact that US military
interventionism is completely disastrous? It just doesn’t happen. You
can understand, then, why empire propagandist Stephen Colbert 
spent
the rest of the interview
 informing
his TV audience that Tulsi Gabbard is dangerous and poisonous.

This was unwatchable. Colbert just went down the list of scripted Gabbard smears (Assad, David Duke) then sermonized about how US military intervention is a force for good in this world. All without telling a single joke. Late night “comedy” shows are propaganda for livestock.

Colbert twice interjected the State Dept.’s line about the alleged Assad chemical attack on his own people; Tulsi then corrected him saying several of the groups, including al Qaeda & ISIS, had been trained by the US and had been reported as being a part of those alleged chemical

Colbert:
You got some heat for meeting with Bashar al-Assad. Do you not
consider him a war criminal? Why did you meet with that man?

Gabbard:
In the pursuit of peace and security. If we are not willing to meet
with adversaries, potential adversaries, in the pursuit of peace and
security, the only alternative is more war. That’s why I took that
meeting with Assad. In pursuit of peace and security. 

Colbert:
Do you believe he is a war criminal? Do you believe he gassed his own
people or committed atrocities against his own people?

Gabbard:
Yes. Reports have shown that that’s a fact.

Colbert:
So you believe the intelligence agencies on that. Because I head that
you did not necessarily believe those reports.

The
reason I call Colbert a propagandist and not simply a liberal empire
loyalist who happens to have been elevated by billionaire media is
because these are carefully constructed narratives that he is
reciting, and they weren’t constructed by him.

Trying
to make it look to the audience as though Gabbard is in some way
loyal to Assad has been a high-priority agenda of the mainstream
media ever since she announced her presidential candidacy.

We
saw it in 
her
recent appearance
 on The
View
,
where John McCain’s sociopathic daughter called her an “Assad
apologist” and demanded that Gabbard call Assad an enemy of the
United States. We saw it in her recent 
CNN
town hall
,
where a consultant 
who
worked on Obama’s 2008 campaign
 was
presented as an ordinary audience member to help CNN’s Dana Bash
paint Gabbard’s skepticism of intelligence reports about an alleged
chemical weapons attack by the Syrian government as something that is
weird and suspicious, instead of the only sane position in a
post-Iraq invasion world. We saw it in 
her
appearance
 on
MSNBC’s 
Morning
Joe
 last
month, where the entire panel piled on her in outrage that she
wouldn’t call Assad an enemy of the United States. It’s such a common
propaganda talking point that the 
New
York Times

Bari Weiss famously 
made
a laughingstock of herself
 by
repeating it as self-evident truth on 
The
Joe Rogan Experience
 without
having the faintest clue what specific facts it was meant to refer
to, just because she’d heard establishment pundits saying it so much.

This
is an organized smear by the mass media attempting to marry Gabbard
in the eyes of the public to a Middle Eastern leader whom the
propagandists have already sold as a child-murdering monster, and
Colbert is participating in it here just as much as the serious news
media talking heads are. It’s been frustrating to watch Gabbard 
fold
to this smear campaign
 by
acting like it’s an established fact that Assad “gases his own
people” and not the hotly contested empire-serving narrative she
knows it is.

Gabbard
is being targeted by this smear because she challenges US political
orthodoxy on military violence (the glue which holds the empire
together), so no amount of capitulation will keep them from trying to
prevent the public from trusting her words.

(de video in het volgende Twitterbericht kan ik niet overnemen, zie hiervoor het origineel)

The journalist interrogating Tulsi seems to believe that US forces in Syria are fighting Assad. Tulsi corrects her, says those troops were deployed there to fight ISIS. These people don’t even know what’s happening in the places they want the US to occupy

2:11

640K views

“I
don’t know whether America should be the policemen of the world,”
Colbert 
said after
Gabard defended her position.

“It
is my opinion that we should not be,” Gabbard replied, causing
Colbert to launch into a stuffy, embarrassing sermon on the virtues
of interventionism and US hegemony that would make Bill Kristol
blush.

“If
we are not, though, nature abhors a vacuum, and if we are not
involved in international conflicts, or trying to quell international
conflicts, certainly the Russians and the Chinese will fill that
vacuum. And we will step away from the world stage in a significant
way that might destabilize the world, because the United States,
however flawed, is a force for good in the world in my opinion. Would
you agree with that?”

Again,
this is a 
comedy show.

Gabbard
explained that in order to be a force for good in the world the
United States has to actually do good, which means not raining fire
upon every nation it dislikes all the time. 
Colbert
responded
 by
reading off his blue index card to repeat yet another tired
anti-Gabbard smear.

“You’ve
gotten some fans in the Trump supporter world: David Duke, Steve
Bannon, and, uh, Matt, uh, Gaetz, is that his name? Matt Gaetz? What
do you make of how much they like you?”

This
one is particularly vile, partly because Gabbard
has 
repeatedly and unequivocally
denounced David Duke, who has a 
long-established
and well-known history
 of
injecting himself into the drama of high-profile conversations in
order to maintain the illusion of relevance, and partly because it’s
a completely irrelevant point that is brought up solely for the
purpose of marrying Tulsi Gabbard’s name to a former Ku Klux Klan
leader. Colbert 
only brought
this up (and 
made Newsweek totally
squee
)
because he wanted to assist in that marrying. The fact that there are
distasteful ideologies which also happen to oppose US interventionism
for their own reasons does not change the undeniable fact that US
military interventionism is consistently disastrous and never helpful
and robs the US public of resources that are rightfully theirs.

This
interview was easily Colbert’s most blatant establishment rim job
I’ve ever seen, surpassing even the time 
he
corrected his own audience
 when
they cheered at James Comey’s firing to explain to them that Comey is
a good guy now and they’re meant to like him. Colbert’s show is
blatant propaganda for human livestock, and the fact that this is
what American “comedy” shows look like now is nauseating.

When
Tulsi Gabbard first announced her candidacy 
I
predicted
 that
she’d have the narrative control engineers scrambling all over
themselves to kill her message, and it’s been even more spectacular
than I imagined. I don’t agree with everything she says and does, but
by damn this woman is shaking up the establishment narrative matrix
more than anybody else right now. She’s certainly keeping it
interesting.

__________________________

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

Bitcoin
donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Caitlin
Johnstone
 |
March 13, 2019 at 12:38 pm |

Tags: ColbertLate
Show
MSMPoliticspropagandaTulsi
Gabbard
 |
Categories: 
ArticleNews |
URL: 
https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1AH

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

Zie ook:

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

Afgelopen
woensdag werd Madeline Albright’, minister BuZa en
oorlogsmisdadiger onder Clinton ‘op de gril gelegd’ door Ilan Omar,
een democratisch vertegenwoordiger* in het lagerhuis van Minnesota, een vrouw die de laatste tijd volkomen terecht en opvallend luid aan de weg timmert.

Onderwerp
van gesprek, zoals je al uit de kop begrepen had, waren en zijn de sancties die
de VS andere landen oplegde/oplegt en de militaire interventies (lees: illegale oorlogen) die de VS
keer op keer voert (en dat tegen landen waar de VS niets te zoeken
heeft, Ap)

Wat betreft de illegale oorlogen zei Albright over Afghanistan dat de VS dat land aanviel omdat daar de kapers van 9/11 vandaan kwamen >> dit is een pertinente leugen: het overgrote deel van de kapers kwam uit Saoedi-Arabië, waarmee de VS nog steeds goed bevriend is en dat het zelfs steunt bij de genocide die dit land samen met andere terreurstaten uitoefent in Jemen…… Over 9/11 gesproken: het land dat het meest baat had bij die aanslagen was de VS zelf en meer gespecificeerd, het militair-industrieel complex en de geheime diensten van de VS….

Ook de illegale oorlog van de VS tegen Libië was volgens Albright gerechtigd, Khadaffi zou een bloedige dictator zou geweest**, terwijl de bevolking onder zijn bewind in welstand leefde: zo goed als gratis huisvesting, scholing voor jongens en meisjes, waar studenten (mannen en vrouwen) zelfs in het buitenland mochten studeren op kosten van de regering, waar ook de huisvesting en leefgeld voor die studenten werden betaald! Of wat dacht je van de gratis medische zorg en bijna gratis energielevering…… 

Libië, het eens rijkste land van Afrika is verworden tot bijna het armste en het ontbreekt de bevolking nu aan alles, meisjes mogen niet meer naar school en het volk leeft in grote chaos, een land waar nu openlijk slavenmarkten worden gehouden…… Nee, echt een succes Albright, die illegale oorlog!!!

Ondanks
dat sancties vooral het gewone volk treffen, durfde Albright een
aantal jaren geleden in het tv programma 60 Minutes tegen presentator
Lesley Stahl te zeggen dat ze nog steeds achter de sancties stond die
ze Irak onder Saddam Hoessein oplegde en waardoor 500.000 Iraakse kinderen
omkwamen…… De dood van die half miljoen kinderen, zo stelde Albright, waren zelfs met terugwerkende kracht nog steeds de moeite waard……. Dit terwijl het niets veranderde aan de Iraakse situatie destijds……..

Albright
staat nog steeds achter het sanctieapparaat (in feite chantage en zoals destijds in Irak zelfs massamoord) dat de VS in feite illegaal gebruikt tegen haar onwelgevallige landen…… Albright schijnt godbetert nog steeds les te geven en daar onderwijst ze ook sancties en de zin daarvan…. 

Jammer dat Omar niet begon over de 500.000 kinderen die in Irak omkwamen….. Al moet ik
zeggen dat het me meevalt dat de gitzwarte kwaadaardige trol Albright nu
zegt dat de sancties die heden ten dage worden opgelegd, alleen
opgelegd mogen worden als ze de gewone bevolking niet treffen, waarmee ze haar eerdere verdediging van de sancties tegen Irak in feite heeft herroepen……

Dit nog naast het feit dat de VS, zoals gezegd, alleen landen ‘aanvalt’ met sancties als de regering van dat land niet de hielen van de VS likt, als dit namelijk wel het geval is, maakt het de VS niet uit hoe vaak mensenrechten worden geschonden of zelfs massamoorden worden gepleegd….. Zie nogmaals de verhouding van de VS met landen als Saoedi-Arabië, Israël, Egypte, Honduras, Guatemala, Colombia, Brazilië en ga nog maar een half uur door…..

Lees
het meer uitgebreide artikel van Eoin Higgins, eerder gepubliceerd op
Common Dreams en door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media:

Ilhan
Omar Questions Madeline Albright on Failures of US Military
Intervention and Sanctions

“As
someone who understands the horrors of war firsthand,” noted
Minnesota Democrat, “I worry when we fail to consider the human
toll of war and our moral responsibility to the people of these
countries.”

February
28, 2019 at 9:28 pm

Written
by 
Eoin
Higgins

(CD— While
much of the country was watching the testimony of Michael Cohen on
Wednesday, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) was questioning former Secretary
of State Madeline Albright in a separate, largely vacant hearing room
about sanctions and the pitfalls of past U.S. military interventions.

Some
scholars and practitioners of foreign policy have questioned whether
sanctions are effective in changing the behavior of certain
governments,” Omar said, pointing out that economic sanctions can
have dire effects on the innocent populations of targeted countries.

Albright,
who once infamously told 60 Minutes reporter Lesley Stahl that the
deaths of half-a-million Iraqi children due to sanctions were “worth
it” to get rid of then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, said
sanctions still have a role to play in American foreign policy.

Sanctions
should be understood as a foreign policy tactic between diplomacy and
force, explained Albright.

We
have learned a lot about sanctions,” said Albright. “We learned
that comprehensive sanctions, which we did in Iraq, hurt the people,
and we began to look at targeted or smart sanctions.”

Omar
and Albright’s exchange came during a 
hearing (pdf)
in the House Foreign Affairs Committee Wednesday 
entitled “The
Trump Administration’s Foreign Policy: A Mid-Term Assessment.”
Albright was on hand to discuss the administration’s priorities and
didn’t hold back in her assessment of the first two years of the
Trump doctrine.

The
administration’s record is marked by confusion, inconsistency, a
lack of diplomacy, and, in some cases, a complete abdication of
responsibility,” Albright said in her testimony, who added that the
State Department’s funding and staffing woes were adding to a loss
of U.S. standing in the world.

Newly-elected
to the House, Omar joined 
The
Intercept
‘s
Medhi Hassan this week to discuss her first two months in office.
Listen to the podcast 
here.

Watch
the full exchange between Omar and Albright below:

(zie daarvoor het origineel op: Common Dreams): 

Embedded video

Rep. Ilhan Omar

@Ilhan

Vietnam

Iraq

Afghanistan

Libya

As someone who understands the horrors of war firsthand, I worry when we fail to consider the human toll of war and our moral responsibility to the people of these countries.

Honored to discuss this with Secretary of State Madeline Albright.


1,432

7:04 PM – Feb 27, 2019



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

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

Mijn excuus, had haar partij moeten noemen: Ilhan Omar, heeft sinds 2017 een zetel in het lagerhuis van Minnesota voor de Minnesota Demcratic-Farmer-Labor Party (toegevoegd op 10 maart 2019).



** De opstand in Libië werd door de VS georganiseerd (CIA)…….

Meer berichten met Omar:

Fox News veroordeelt eigen presentator voor belachelijke uitlatingen aangaande Ilhan Omar

Ilhan Omar: Obama zette kinderen in een kooi en kwam weg met moord

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

AIPAC, een pro-Israël lobbygroep, koopt leden van het VS congres om met 4 miljoen dollar per jaar

Zie ook:

BBC met uiterst hypocriete anti-Taliban propaganda

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

Hier nog een paar voorbeelden van VS terreur:

VS vermoordde meer dan 20 miljoen mensen sinds het einde van WOII……..‘ (tot het jaar 2000)

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

List of wars involving the United States

VS: openlijke militaire oefening met terreurgroep in Syrië……

Bang voor Amerika

NAVO gaat VS helpen in Zuid-Amerika terreur uit te oefenen: Colombia lid van de NAVO………

VS commando’s vechten o.a. in Midden- en Zuid-Amerika, aldus het VS ministerie van oorlog………

VS heeft Rusland al 3 keer met oorlog gedreigd, de laatste 2 keer in de afgelopen 1,5 week……‘ (bericht van 5 oktober 2018)

Laatste aanpassing op 10 maart 2019, een verduidelijking aangaande Albright en Omar. ‘Links’ toegevoegd op 12 maart 2019. Verdere links toegevoegd op 4 september 2019 en op 10 september 2019.

De VS bombardeert landen in het Midden-Oosten >> Europa krijgt de vluchtelingen

Eric
Zuesse heeft een artikel geplaatst op de Strategic Culture Foundation,
waarin hij ten overvloede (maar volkomen terecht) stelt dat de VS, met hulp van
NAVO lidstaten Groot-Brittannië en Frankrijk, dood en verderf zaait
in landen waar het niets te zoeken heeft…… (landen in het Midden-Oosten, waar ik in dit geval ook Libië en Afghanistan toe reken) Door deze grootschalige
terreur zijn enorme stromen vluchtelingen op gang gekomen,
vluchtelingen die hun heil zoeken in Europa en dan m.n. in de EU,
niet alleen omdat dit de meest dichtstbijzijnde plek is waar men de
oorlog definitief achter zich kan laten, maar ook omdat de VS botweg
weigert vluchtelingen uit het Midden-Oosten op te nemen….. Dit was overigens in iets mindere mate al zo onder de Obama regering…..


Zuesse
wijst op de leugens die het westerse publiek (inclusief het Nederlandse) dagelijks op haar bord
geserveerd krijgt, zoals de leugens dat landen als Afghanistan, Irak,
Libië en Syrië, een gevaar vormen voor hun veiligheid…… Een
leugen zo doortrapt, dat ze zelfs een volkomen omdraaiing van feiten
is, immers de grootschalige westerse terreur in het Midden-Oosten
zorgt juist voor terreur op de straten van vooral de EU…….

De
hiervoor genoemde landen, vier landen kunnen zelfs amper worden gezien als
een gevaar voor de hen omringende landen, waar alleen Irak
als agressor kan worden aangewezen, dan wijs ik vooral op de oorlog
van Irak tegen Iran in de 80er jaren, waar deze vooral de VS goed
uitkwam, sterker nog: de VS heeft destijds Saddam Hoessein opgejut
Iran aan te vallen….. 


Nederland onderhield ook goede banden met Saddam Hoessein, zo kon VVD plork Bolkestein een exportvergunning afgeven voor de levering van onderdelen tot het bereiden van gifgas, iets waarvoor hij destijds uit en te na werd gewaarschuwd door deskundigen, daarmee is deze Bolkestein een enorme oorlogsmisdadiger!

Lees
dit uitstekende artikel waarin Zuesse gedetailleerd uitlegt hoe VS
bemoeienissen hebben geleid tot de dood van alleen deze eeuw al ruim
meer dan 2 miljoen slachtoffers, die in feite werden vermoord door de
VS, met hulp van een aantal NAVO landen, waaronder Nederland….. (waar niet vergeten dient te
worden dat de NAVO een speeltje is van de VS, zo liet het beest Trump de afgelopen dagen nog eens fijntjes zien tijdens de NAVO

top in Brussel…..)

America
Bombs, Europe Gets the Refugees. That’s Evil

America Bombs, Europe Gets the Refugees. That’s Evil

ERIC
ZUESSE
 |
09.07.2018 | 
WORLD / EUROPEMIDDLE
EAST

The
US Government (with France and a few other US allies) bombs Libya,
Syria, etc.; and the US regime refuses to accept any of the resulting
refugees — the burdens from which are now breaking the EU, and 
the
EU is sinking in economic competition against America’s
international corporations
.
America’s corporations remain blithely unscathed by not only 
the
refugees
 that
are breaking up the EU, but also by the EU’s economic sanctions
against Russia, Iran, and other allies of governments that the US
regime is trying to overthrow in its constant invasions and coups.
The US Government makes proclamations such as “Assad must go!” —
but by what right is the US Government involved, at all, in
determining whom the leaders in Syria will be? Syria never invaded
the US In fact, Syria never invaded anywhere (except, maybe, Israel,
in order to respond against Israel’s invasions). Furthermore, 
all
polling, even by Western pollsters, shows that Bashar al-Assad would
easily win any free and fair election in Syria.
 The
US Government claims to support democracy, but it does the exact
opposite whenever they want to get rid of a Government that is
determined to protect that nation’s sovereignty over its own
national territory, instead of to yield it to the US regime, or to
any other foreigners. The US regime has 
virtually
destroyed the United Nations
.

The
US regime even 
refuses
to provide restitution to Syria for its bombings, and for its arming
and training of the jihadists — the fundamentalist Sunni
mercenaries recruited from around the world — who are the US
regime’s “boots on the ground” trying to overthrow Syria’s
Government
.
Al Qaeda 
has
led
 the
dozens of 
jihadist
groups that have served as the US regime’s “boots on the ground”
to overthrow Assad
,
but Al Qaeda is 
good
enough to serve the purpose
,
in the US regime’s view of things. The US regime says that there
will be 
no
restitution to Syria
 unless
Syria accepts being ruled by 
‘rebels’
whose leadership
 is actually
being chosen by the US regime’s chief ally, the
fundamentalist-Sunni Saud family
,
who already own Saudi Arabia, and who 
(along
with the CIA) have been unsuccessfully trying, ever since 1949, to
take over the committedly secular, non-sectarian, nation of Syria
.
In fact, the CIA perpetrated 
two
of the three Syrian coups
 that
were carried out in 1949. 

The
US regime, and its allies, have used the Muslim Brotherhood, in order
to recruit into Syria the 100,000+ jihadists from around the world to
fight to overthrow Syria’s secular Government. Even the BBC’s 13
December 2013 detailed report, 
“Guide
to the Syrian rebels”
,
made clear that the “Syrian Rebels” were, in fact, overwhelmingly
jihadist and largely recruited from abroad. These were hardly
democrats. Even a Tony-Blair-founded anti-Assad NGO’s study
concluded that 
“Sixty
per cent of major Syrian rebel groups are Islamist 
extremists (not
just “Islamists” but “Islamist extremists”) and yet the
Blair outfit still supported the overthrow of the committed
secularist Assad (just as Blair had earlier participated himself in
the US regime’s 
destruction
of Iraq
). 

The
fundamentalist-Sunni royal Thani family own Qatar and have been the
top international funders of the Muslim Brotherhood, just as the
fundamentalist-Sunni royal Saud family, who 
own
Saudi Arabia
,
have been 
the
top funders of Al Qaeda
.
The main difference between the Sauds and the Thanis has been that
whereas 
the
Sauds hate Shia
 (and
that means 
especially
Iran
),
the Thanis don’t. Thus, for the Sauds, this is a war against the
Shia center, Iran, and not only against Syria. This war
against Syria was a coordinated US-Saud-Thani operation, in which the
fundamentalist-Sunni group, Al Qaeda, provided the leadership but 
the
(pan-Islamic) fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood provided the largest
recruiting website
.
This entire hyper-aggressive operation was internationally
coordinated. 
The
Obama Administration started planning this operation, under Hillary
Clinton, in 2010.
 As
even the neoconservative (i.e., US-empire advocating) 
Washington
Post
 reported,
on 17 April 2011, from Wikileaks, 
“It
is unclear whether the State Department is still funding Syrian
opposition groups, but the cables indicate money was set aside [by
the Obama Administration] at least through September 2010.”
 That
article mentioned only “former members of the Muslim
Brotherhood,” not the Muslim Brotherhood itself; and no mention was
made in it to Al Qaeda, in any form. 

Then,
in 2013, the neoconservative 
Foreign
Policy
 magazine
headlined 
“How
the Muslim Brotherhood Hijacked Syria’s Revolution”
 and
was oblivious regarding the neoconservative Obama Administration’s
having planned that “hijacking,” starting in 2010 (but 
going
back even as far as Obama’s inauguration
;
this operation was a key part of 
his
secret anti-Russia agenda
,
which preceded even his coming into office). But if Obama wasn’t
neocon-enough to suit that magazine’s editors, then Trump certainly
should be, because 
Trump
continues Obama’s foreign policies but with an even more hostile
thrust against the Sauds’
chief
target, which is Iran.
 Above
all, 
the
US alliance’s goal has been for the Saud family’s selected
(rabidly anti-Shiite) people to take over and run the Syrian
Government
.
As Global Security 
has
phrased this matter
,
“The High Negotiations Committee [which is the group who are
negotiating against Assad’s government at the US-sponsored ‘peace’
talks] is a Saudi-backed coalition of Syrian opposition groups. The
High Negotiations Committee (HNC) was created in Saudi Arabia in
December 2015.” 

So,
this war in Syria has actually been the Sauds’ war to take over
Syria. And it actually 
started
in 1949
,
but the 
US-backed
Muslim-Brotherhood-led “Arab Spring” in 2011
 gave
the US and its allies the opportunity to culminate it, finally. 

And
Europe receives the fall-out from it. 
This
fall-out has been hurting European corporations, in international
competition against US corporations.
 It’s not only
political.

The
US regime has 
continued
this thrust, under Obama’s successor
.
US President Donald Trump demands European corporations to end their
business with Shiite Iran (which the Saud family is determined to
take over), and to end their business with Russia, 
which
America’s own billionaires themselves are determined to take over
,
just like the Sauds are determined to take over both Syria and Iran.

And
Europe receives refugees not only from places where the US and some
of its NATO allies have recently been bombing, but even from 
Kosovo,
Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places where NATO has bombed in the
past
,
and even from 
Ukraine,
where the US regime perpetrated a bloody coup in February 2014,
followed there by an ethnic-cleansing campaign to kill the residents
in areas which had voted the heaviest for the overthrown President
.

America
is no actual ally of Europe. The Marshall Plan is 
long-since
finished
,
and America has been taken over by 
psychopaths
who are Europe’s main enemies
,
not Europe’s friends, at all. (They’re friends of some European
aristocracies, but not of 
any European
public, not of even merely one public.)

Iran
and Russia should be Europe’s allies — 
they
didn’t cause any of Europe’s problems
.
America did. America’s intelligence agencies tapped (and 
probably
still tap
)
the phones of Germany’s Chancellor and practically everybody else,
and yet the US regime has the gall to blame Russia for interfering in
the political affairs of European countries. If that isn’t the pot
calling the kettle ‘black’, then what is? If anything, the EU’s
sanctions should be against doing business with American firms
— 
not against
doing business with Russian firms, or with Iranian firms. European
politicians who support the US support Europe’s top enemy.

Russia
is, itself, a European country, which additionally traverses much of
Asia, but America is no European country, 
at
all
,
and yet now is so brazen as to demand that Europe must do America’s
bidding — not only against Russia, but also against the
Sauds’ 
main target,
which is Iran (the same main target as Israel’s).

Why
are Europeans not asking themselves: 
Who is
Europe’s enemy in all of this — what 
causes this
refugee-crisis? The refugees certainly didn’t.

It’s
not Russia, and it’s not Iran, and it’s not China; 
it
is America — which is the true enemy of them all, and of us all —
including even of the American people ourselves
,
because 
the
US Government no longer actually represents the American people
.
These invasions, and military occupations, and coups, do not serve
America’s public; they serve America’s aristocracy. The US is no
longer (
if
it ever was
)
a democracy. The US Government now is the US aristocracy
— 
not the
US public. It’s a 
dictatorship.
And, it has 
the
type of ‘news’media that any dictatorship has
.

On
June 30th, the US aristocracy’s 
New
York Times
 headlined “Bavaria:
Affluent, Picturesque — and Angry”
,
and reported “the new angry center of Europe, the latest
battleground for populists eager to bring down both Chancellor Angela
Merkel of Germany and the idea of a liberal Europe itself.” Their
elitist (pro-US-aristocracy) ‘reporter’ (actually propagandist)
interviewed ‘experts’ who condemn Europe’s politicians that are
trying to assuage their own public’s anger against the EU’s
open-door policy regarding this flood of refugees from 
what
is actually, for the most part, the US regime’s (and its allies’)
bombings — air-support of the boots-on-the-ground jihadist
mercenaries.
 The
combination of this air-support, and of the jihadists, has been the
backbone of the US-Saudi-Israeli effort to overthrow and replace
Syria’s Government.

Libya
was a similar case, but was only friendly toward Russia,
not 
allied with
Russia, as both Syria and Iran are.

The
US aristocracy funds an enormous international PR campaign for all
this.
 These
are 
‘humanitarian’
bombings
 in
order to replace 
a
‘barbaric’ Government
 —
but replace it with what? With one that would be chosen by the Sauds.
And this propaganda-campaign is also funded by the
US-
allied aristocracies. All
of the major ‘news’media, in US and allies, receive their
‘expert’ ‘information’ from these privately-funded and
government-funded propagandists, who are treated by ‘journalists’ as
being objective and experts (which they’re not).

The NYT article
says — and I add here key explanatory links:

This
is not about economics,” said 
Gerald
Knaus
,
the director of the 
European
Stability Initiative
, [and
though unmentioned by the 
Times“The
Open Society Institute was a major core funder”
 of
the ESI, which is] 
a
Berlin-based think tank. “It is about identity and a very
successful populist P.R. machine that is rewriting recent history.”

So:
the 
Times was
secretly (and they didn’t include any links to help online readers
know who was actually funding their ‘experts’, at all) pumping
NATO propaganda, as if it were authentic and neutral news-reporting,
instead of craven service to the US aristocracy that controls the US
Government and its NATO military alliance. This is the 
New
York Times
, itself,
that is “rewriting recent history.” That’s how they do it —
constantly (as ‘news’).

And
here is some of that “recent history” the Times is
“rewriting” (by simply omitting to so much as even just suggest,
but which is 
essential
backgound
 in
order to understand the 
real history
behind this important matter):

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP01-50/RP01-50.pdf

House
of Commons, Research Paper 01/50, 2 May 2001

European
Security and Defence Policy: Nice and Beyond”

pp.
47-48:

On
7 February 2001 the Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, emphasised the
ESDP’s [European Security and Defence Policy’s] tie to NATO
during a press interview, following his meeting in Washington with US
National Security Adviser, Condoleeza Rice. He said:

I
have stressed that the 
European
Security Initiative will strengthen the capacity of Europe to
contribute to crisis management and therefore is welcome to a
Washington that is interested in fairer burden sharing, and
that Washington can be confident that Britain will insist that
the European Security Initiative is firmly anchored on NATO. We are
both determined to see that happen, we are both determined to make
sure that the European Security Initiative carries out its promise to
strengthen the North Atlantic Alliance
.119

——

Though
the Sauds, and also Israel’s aristocracy, are mainly anti-Iran, the
US aristocracy are obsessed with their goal of conquering Russia.
Since Iran, and Syria, are both allied with Russia, the US regime is
trying to overthrow those Russia-allied Governments, before 
going
in for the kill, against Russia itself
.
That’s what all of these economic sanctions, and the bombings and
the backing of Al Qaeda for overthrowing Syria’s Government, are
really all about. 

Is this what
today’s Europeans want their Governments to be doing — and doing
it for 
that reason,
the US aristocracy’s reason? Despite the huge harms it is certainly
causing to Europeans?

Here,
then, is a debate between, on the one hand a retired CIA official who
thinks “Our relationship with Israel causes us war with
Muslims,” versus Representatives in the US Congress who are
actually representatives of Israel’s Government
 and
definitely 
not
representatives
of the American people. Both sides in that debate are acceptable to
the aristocrats who control the US Government, because neither side
argues that the apartheid theocratic Government of Israel is an enemy
of the American people (as is documented actually to be the
case, 
here and here),
nor that 
the
entire problem of Islamic terrorism is fundamentalist-Sunni, and that
only Israel gets hit by terrorism that’s from both Sunnis and
Shiites — that Shiites (the US alliance’s targets) are no terrorist
threat, at all, to Europeans (nor to Americans)
 —
the “Islamist” threat is actually only from fundamentalist
Sunnis, which are the very same groups that are secretly allied with
America’s aristocracy and the Sauds. Neither side of the ‘debate’
acknowledges that both the Sauds and Israel (and 
Israel’s
lobbyists represent internationally also the Sauds’ interests
)
are enemies both of the American people, and of the peoples of
Europe. 

As
the world’s greatest blogger, the former UK Ambassador (but too
honest to stay in that business) Craig Murray, recently said under
the headline, 
“No
Trump, No Clinton, No NATO”
:
“The destruction of Libya’s government and infrastructure
directly caused the Mediterranean boat migrant crisis, which has
poisoned the politics of much of the European Union.” But, of
course, the US regime and its allies have also destroyed other
countries than that — and thus caused refugees to Europe from many
nations. And, finally, 
even
the US Government (though as quietly as possible) acknowledges that
it has destroyed Afghanistan
.
Ironically, that’s the very nation where America and the Sauds, 
in
1979
,
had started their war against all Governments that 
won’t
buckle to them
.

Furthermore,
the US regime intends to keep it up. In case a reader might happen to
think that, surely, the US regime and its allies are going to quit
this rousing of hornets’ nests; Sharmine Narwani, who is one of the
very few non-“embedded” journalists who reports in The West about
— and (which the mainstream ones don’t) 
from 
the war in Syria, headlined, on June 25th, 
“Are
al-Qaeda Affiliates Fighting Alongside US Rebels in Syria’s
South?”
 and
she found that the answer to this question is a resounding yes:

Despite
its US and UN designation as a terrorist organization, Nusra [Al
Qaeda’s main name in Syria] has been openly fighting alongside
the “Southern Front,” a group of 54 opposition militias funded
and commanded by a US-led war room based in Amman, Jordan called the
Military Operations Center (MOC). …

Sources
inside Syria — both opposition fighters and Syrian military brass
(past and present) — suggest the command center consists of the US,
UK, France, Jordan, Israel, and some Persian Gulf states. … In
practice, the US doesn’t appear to mind the Nusra affiliation —
regardless of the fact that the group is a terror organization — as
long as the job gets done.

These
wars, which pour Middle Eastern (and also 
Ukrainian*)
refugees into the EU, are inter-aristocratic conflicts reflecting
inter-aristocratic competitions; and the publics everywhere suffer
enormously from them. The 
gainers
from it
 are
very few but very rich (and they hire very powerful agents in Europe
and elsewhere). Those billionaire gainers, and their agents, should
be Europe’s targets — 
not Russia
and Iran. NATO must end now. Europe needs to be freed, at last, from
America’s permanent-war-for permanent-‘peace’ grip. For
Europeans, who are the indirect victims, to be blaming the refugees,
who are the direct victims, won’t solve anything, but will simply
please the victimizers, as is the public’s ancient habit (to please
the powerful). A break must be made, away from that ugly past.
European publics must lead the way, or no one will.

PS:
Since this article asserts such a large number of things that
contradict what the US Government and its agents assert, I have
sought out and here linked to the highest-quality, least-contested
and most highly authenticated, sources and also to sources that link
to such sources; all of which, taken together, constitute a
book-length proof of the title-case here, that “America Bombs,
Europe Gets the Refugees. That’s Evil.” Furthermore, this online
virtual “book” is tracking back to the most unimpeachable
documents, all of them available merely by means of clicking, and
thus without the reader’s needing to visit a huge scholarly library
(which might be quite distant); so, the reader can here easily branch
out to this entire, and otherwise largely hidden, world of reliable
sources, which the US regime wants the public not to know, and
certainly not to 
understand.
It’s no longer necessary to be an intelligence-professional in
order to come to understand what the regime wants the public 
not to
understand.

Tags: European
Union
  Middle
East
  Migration 

ERIC ZUESSE   Eric ZUESSE


‘American’ writer and investigative historian.

*
Kleine vergissing: de Oekraïners die Oost-Oekraïne ontvluchten
vanwege de bombardementen van het Oekraïense leger (voor het grootste
deel bevolkt met neonazi’s), vluchten niet naar de EU, maar naar
Rusland. (ze zouden al worden vermoord, voordat ze de westgrens van Oekraïne bereikten…..)

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

Bolton* was één van de verantwoordelijken voor de illegale oorlog van de VS
tegen Irak in 2003. Deze kwaadaardige smeerlap zit door Trump hoger
in het zadel dan ooit en hij trekt samen met Netanyahu op tegen Iran,
met leugens en haatzaaierij proberen de 2, vaak aangeduid als B&B, een oorlog uit te lokken
tegen Iran…..

In
september 2002 sprak Netanyahu het VS congres toe en destijds durfde
hij glashard te zeggen, dat de verwijdering van het Saddam
Hoessein bewind een enorm positieve invloed zou hebben op de
regio…… De gevolgen van de illegale oorlog tegen Irak in 2003,
die Saddam Hoessein het leven kostte, heeft behalve de dood van 1,5
miljoen Irakezen, de regio in een grote chaos gedompeld……. Nee ‘echt enorm positief allemaal….’

De oorlog tegen het Syrische bewind is zonder meer door de VS geïnitieerd, al in  2006 maakte de VS met o.a. Turkije, Saoedi-Arabië en Groot-Brittannië de eerste plannen om het Assad bewind omver te werpen. De opstand (‘Arabische Lente’, beter gezegd: de VS Lente in het Midden-Oosten) in Syrië werd dan ook geregisseerd door de VS, dat tevens (samen met S-A) terreurgroepen uit Libië transporteerde richting Syrië en hen van wapens en rollend materieel heeft voorzien…….

‘Helaas’ voor de VS en haar samenzweerders, Assad kreeg men niet weg, plan mislukt, maar Syrië ligt wel voor een groot deel in puin en het is maar de vraag of de bevolkingsgroepen met verschillende religies in de toekomst nog naast elkaar kunnen leven, zoals ze dat deden voor de VS terreur losbarstte……..

Nu
zal Iran er aan moeten geloven, althans als Bolton, Netanyahu en
uiteraard de gehele Trump administratie hun zin krijgen……

Lees
het volgende artikel van Marco Carnelos, gepubliceerd op Middle EastEye (MEE):

Benjamin
Netanyahu and John Bolton are stirring up a fire in the Middle East –
again

#Diplomacy

The
Bibi and Bolton duo is now back in business sowing hatred and
conflict in the region

Marco
Carnelos

Marco Carnelos's picture

Wednesday
16 May 2018 06:32 UTC   

Wednesday
16 May 2018 11:17 UTC

A
disturbing sense of deja vu is permeating the Middle East. The sequel
of a movie, screened in the winter of 2002-2003, is under production.
With the same producer, director, screenplay and actors. John Bolton,
US President Donald Trump’s new national security adviser, who – in
the first movie – played the villain undermining the UN inspection
regime in Iraq, is now the chief villain.

Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also has a leading role, while in
2002 he was only a supporting actor. However, his testimony at the US
Congress hearings on 12 September 2002 was not only an Oscar
performance, it will also go down in history as one of the most
accurate political prediction ever.

Netanyahu
confidently said: “If you take out Saddam’s [Hussain] regime, I
assure you it will have enormous positive reverberations in the
region.” He was absolutely right. Except for the fact that
the reverberations were positive only for Iran. Maybe also his
bizarre presentation on 30 April this year concerning Iran’s alleged
nuclear cheating will be remembered as another outstanding
performance.

Middle
East fire

B&B,
the duo of Bibi and Bolton, is manufacturing another crisis that
promises another bonanza for Iran: Washington has withdrawn from the
nuclear deal with Tehran, Syria is a shooting range for Israeli
fighters, the US embassy move to Jerusalem is stirring Arab and
Muslim anger, more than 100 Palestinians protesters have been killed
in Gaza so far – and, last but not least, a forthcoming
Israeli-Palestinian “peace plan” – courtesy of the US
president’s acquired family – could become, voluntarily assisted by
Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, the euthanasia of
Palestinian struggle.

In
more simple words: the Middle East’s fire has been effectively
stirred up again. The sequel to the Iraq war, “The Israel-Iran
War in Syria”, could not hope for a better advertising campaign
for its imminent release, and for the forthcoming final chapter of
the trilogy: “Regime change in Tehran.”

If
Iran was looking for a lobby firm to further improve its standing in
the Middle East, it could have never found a better partner than B&B
& Associates.

After
the excellent services rendered in Iraq in 2003, the firm is now back
in business sowing hatred and resentment in the region. Qassem
Suleimani, who leads Iran’s Quds Force, the elite special forces
arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, could take a vacation,
stopping further foreign meddling and wait comfortably for the
bonuses brought free of charge by B&B.

An
impending conflict

Leaving
sarcasm and metaphor aside, the perception of an impeding conflict in
the region is growing. The situation is reminicient of Europe in
the summer of 1914. At the time no one wished for a prolonged
conflict, but Europe ended up entrapped in a long and unprecedentedly
bloody war that changed European and Middle Eastern history. The hope
is that history will not repeat itself in Syria.

Israel
and its partners resemble to a poker player who has played his hand
badly and is trying to recover (AFP)

Although
this time round rules of engagement have been set and enforced by
Russia, Syria is crowded by so many actors that the chances of
miscalculation and escalation cannot be ignored. Last week, Netanyahu
visited Moscow, probably not just to attend a military parade, but to
reinforce these rules and, hopefully, to get from Putin a “cleared”
and less provocative targeting list for Israeli jets in Syria.

The
Middle East’s shifting power balance is another driver for a
conflict. As Germany’s rising in 1914 was a catalyst for the First
World War, Iran could follow the same script, also because Tehran’s
rise is accelerating, especially since the US invasion of Iraq in
2003 and its catastrophically managed aftermath.

Syrian
President Bashar al- Assad is winning; recent Lebanese elections have
consolidated Hezbollah’s powers. Irrespective of Moqtada Al Sadr’s
victory in the Iraqi elections, the political outcome in the country
will be more favourable to Tehran than Washington, and, finally,
Yemen is becoming the Afghanistan of Saudi Arabia.

Such
a debacle cannot be tolerated any longer by the Axis of Restoration,
the unholy alliance of the US, Israel and Sunni Arab kingdoms. The
“existential threat” represented by Tehran, Baghdad,
Damascus and Beirut, the Axis of Resistance, must be stopped and
rolled back.

Two
options

Israel
is at the forefront of this effort providing the narrative,
Washington is selling the military procurement, and Riyadh, as usual,
is giving the money. The first theatre selected to inverse the trend
is the already devastated Syria, while the main target is now the
Iranian presence in the country.

                  

Israel
and its partners resemble a poker player who had played his hand
badly and is trying to recover from a largely compromised
situation. The obsession with the Shia Crescent led to more than a
flirtation with the Sunni jihadists in a joint bid for Assad’s
removal; unfortunately, the conflict took an outcome different from
the one hoped for.

Israel
and its partners are now confronted with two options: accepting the
fait-accompli, and disguising it with irrelevant strikes on secondary
Syrian targets cleared by Moscow, or overthrowing the table through a
direct conflict.

Trump’s
decision on Iran’s nuclear file should be understood within such a
context. It is similar to a wife who starts a lawsuit for divorce
today because her husband could betray her in 15 years time; in one
word: absurd.

It
is so self-damaging that it must conceal something else: a green
light for an Israeli-Iranian conflict in Syria. Effectively,
remaining at this poker table, the game is perceived as largely
compromised, and is no longer sustainable even for the serial
self-harming members of the Axis of Restoration.

Trump’s
proclaimed intention to disengage from the region is not serious. He
has already shown the capacity to disprove himself with the same ease
with which he breathes. Of course, if the US joins Israel in the
conflict, the chances of success would improve, but also the risks.

Russia
could react. Furthermore, it will not be easy to lure Iran into an
open conflict providing the solid casus belli that is currently
missing. Iranian leadership usually acts with restraint and prefers
to choose the timing and the place for its retaliation against
“provocations”.

Last
but not least, although B&B are specialised in manufacturing
cases for war, their reliability and marketing capabilities have
become less and less convincing. 

And,
by the way, Middle East is still experiencing, after 15 years, the
“unintended consequences” of the first chapter of the
trilogy. Stay tuned: the best is yet to come.


Marco Carnelos
 is
a former Italian diplomat. He has been assigned in Somalia, Australia
and at the United Nations. He has served in the foreign policy staff
of three Italian prime ministers between 1995 and 2011. More recently
he has been Middle East Peace Process Coordinator Special Envoy for
Syria for the Italian government and, until November 2017, ambassador
of Italy to Iraq.

The
views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not
necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Photo: US
President Donald Trump speaks alongside National Security Adviser
John Bolton (R) during a cabinet meeting in the Cabinet Room of the
White House in Washington, DC, 9 May 2018
 (AFP)

READ
MORE ►

Dancing
on the dead: US embassy opens an era of bloodshed

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

* Bolton is tevens verantwoordelijk voor de veranderde houding van Noord-Korea de laatste week, waar die houding niet ineens plotseling is veranderd, zoals de
reguliere media je willen doen geloven, maar juist vanwege Boltons
uitlating over Noord-Korea en het Libië scenario dat hij het liefst
daar wil uitrollen. Niet Noord-Korea is totaal onbetrouwbaar, maar de
VS en dat heeft dit gestolen land al ongelofelijk vaak laten
zien, zoals in het geval van de illegale VS oorlog tegen Libië…… 

Zie ook: ‘Iran houdt zich aan de nucleaire deal dit in tegenstelling tot de VS……..

       en: ‘Israël laat alweer haar ware terreur gezicht zien: IS kan tijdelijke ‘geallieerde worden’ in de strijd tegen Iran en Hezbollah………

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

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

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

       en: ‘Protesten Iran opgezet door de VS en Israël

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

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

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

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

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

       en: ‘Washington uit op oorlog met Iran……

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

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

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

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

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

       en: ‘VS ambtenaren: Israël zoekt steun VS voor oorlog tegen Iran…….

       en: ‘Israël laat er geen twijfel over bestaan: met het uit de Iran-deal stappen van de VS is definitief de oorlog verklaard aan Iran………

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

       en: ‘VS, de werelddictator: Iran-deal is van nul en generlei waarde (op basis van leugens en achterklap)…….

       en: ‘Israël voert vergelding uit voor zelf uitgelokte beschieting (middels meer dan 100 bombardementen…….)

      en: ‘Iran-deal: de echte reden waarom Trump deze deal de nek heeft omgedraaid

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

      en: ‘VS ‘laat zien op vrede uit te zijn’ door dreiging Iran te vermorzelen……

      en: ‘Iran: wanneer heeft dit land voor het laatst een ander land aangevallen? 200 jaar geleden…..

      en: ‘Iran het volgende slachtoffer van ongebreidelde VS terreur

PS: ben het niet eens met de opgenomen kaart in bovenstaand artikel >> Iran zou de Houthi rebellen steunen in Jemen, echter behalve humanitaire goederen uit Iran is daar verder niets van gebleken. Jemen, waar Saoedi-Arabie met hulp van andere arabische landen, de VS en GB een genocide uitvoert op de sjiitische bevolking, iets waarvoor hier amper of geen belangstelling is, ondanks dat hiervoor een jaar geleden een inzamelingsactie tegen de hongersnood in Jemen werd gevoerd……… 

Excuus, zag na plaatsing dat ik de links naar gerelateerde berichten was vergeten en deze alsnog toegevoegd.

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

Met de benoemingen van John Bolton, een gewetenloze
psychopaat en zijn collega psychopaat Pompeo, kan je gerust
stellen dat Trump een oorlogskabinet heeft gevormd, zo betoogt Robert
Mackey terecht. Op 23 maart jl. publiceerde hij een
artikel op The Intercept, over de benoeming van Bolton.

Hierin vertelt Mackey o.a. dat Bolton aan
gevluchte Iraniërs in de VS heeft beloofd dat voor 2019 Iran een
andere regime zal hebben (een door de VS gewenst regime, zoals je begrijpt….) en hij dan feest komt vieren in
Teheran…….. 

Naast psychopaat is deze misdadiger ook nog eens
ongelofelijk dom immers in Irak is er nog steeds geen vrede, ondanks
de meer dan achterlijke vaststelling van zijne domme hufterigheid en oorlogsmisdadiger Bush
dat de ‘mission accomplished’ was, is het in feite nog steeds oorlog
in Irak, een oorlog die intussen aan dik meer dan 1,5 miljoen mensen het leven heeft gekost……….

Hoe denkt topidioot Bolton dan Iran in
een jaar tijd te kunnen verslaan? Iran heeft een uitermate goed
getraind leger, dit i.t.t. tot het leger dat Saddam Hoessein in Irak
ter beschikking stond….. Kernraketten gebruiken tegen Iran staat zo te horen niet op de
verlanglijst van Bolton, daar hij zelf feest wil vieren in Teheran, al zal het me niet verbazen als Bolton denkt dat een zwaar radioactief besmet gebied binnen een paar maanden ‘schoon waait’. Voorts zijn er nog de nieuwe tactische kernwapens van de VS, kernwapens die op het slagveld gebruikt moeten gaan
worden en daar alleen ‘een beperkt gebied’ zwaar radioactief besmet zouden maken…….. 

Dan is er nog de vraag wat Rusland en
China zullen doen, als de VS een oorlog tegen Iran begint (met
de kans dat de VS ook een tweede front opent op Noord-Korea), gezien de
troepenopbouw her en der…….

The
Intercept

ROBERT
MACKEY

Here’s
John Bolton Promising Regime Change in Iran by the End of 2018

Pandeli Majko, Former Prime Minister of Albania, John Bolton, Former United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Deputy Chief of U.S. Mission David Muniz, Maryam Rajavi, President elect of the Iranians Resistance, Tirana, Albania 20/03/2017 - Maryam Rajavi addressed her greeting at Nowruz celebration, the Iranian New Year, which was held at Tirana Albania with PMOI members and guests from Albania, France and United States. Maryam Rajavi said, This Nowruz harbingers end of religious dictatorship and advent of the spring of freedom. (Photo by Siavosh Hosseini/NurPhoto) *** Please Use Credit from Credit Field ***(Sipa via AP Images)

March
23 2018, 8:38 p.m.

AMONG
THOSE MOST
 alarmed
by President Donald Trump’s selection of 
John
Bolton
 as
his new national security adviser on Thursday were supporters of the
Iran nuclear deal, the 2015 international agreement that curbed
Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for a partial lifting of
economic sanctions.

Rob
Malley, who coordinated Middle East policy in the Obama
administration, observed that Bolton’s appointment, along with the
nomination of Iran deal critic Mike Pompeo as secretary of state,
seemed to signal that the agreement would most likely be “
dead
and buried

within months. Trita Parsi, leader of the National Iranian American
Council 
wrote
on Twitter
:
“People, let this be very clear: The appointment of Bolton is
essentially a declaration of war with Iran. With Pompeo and Bolton,
Trump is assembling a WAR CABINET.”

Their
alarm was understandable. Bolton, who made his name as a belligerent
member of George W. Bush’s State Department and a Fox News
contributor, has not only 
demanded that
the Trump administration withdraw from the nuclear deal, he also
previously advocated 
bombing
Iran instead
.
Bolton has spent the better part of a decade 
calling
for
 the
United States to help 
overthrow the
theocratic government in Tehran and hand power to a cult-like group
of Iranian exiles with no real support inside the country.

John Bolton

@AmbJohnBolton

Withdrawing from the Iran should be a top @realDonaldTrump administration priority.

Just
eight months ago, at a Paris gathering, Bolton told members of the
Iranian exile group, known as the Mujahedeen Khalq, MEK, or People’s
Mujahedeen, that the Trump administration should embrace their goal
of immediate regime change in Iran and recognize their group as a
“viable” alternative.

The
outcome of the president’s policy review should be to determine
that the Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1979 revolution will not last until
its 40th birthday,” 
Bolton
said
.
(The 40th anniversary of the Iranian revolution will be on February
11, 2019.) “The declared policy of the United States should be the
overthrow of the mullahs’ regime in Tehran,” Bolton added. “The
behavior and the objectives of the regime are not going to change
and, therefore, the only solution is to change the regime itself.”

As
the Iranian expatriate journalist Bahman Kalbasi noted, Bolton
concluded his address to the exiles with a rousing promise: “And
that’s why, before 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran!”

Bahman Kalbasi

@BahmanKalbasi

8 months ago among MEK supporters tells them they will overthrow ’s regime and celebrate in with Bolton himself present, “before 2019”

To
understand how extraordinary it is that the man about to become the
president’s most senior national security official made this
promise to the MEK, it is important to know that, until recently, the
Iranian dissidents had spent three decades trying to achieve their
aims through violence, including terrorist attacks.

After
members of the MEK helped foment the 1979 revolution, in part
by 
killing
American civilians
 working
in Tehran, the group then lost a bitter struggle for power to the
Islamists led by the revolution’s leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah
Khomeini. With its leadership forced to flee Iran in 1981, the MEK’s
members set up a government-in-exile in France and established a
military base in Iraq, where they were given arms and training by
Saddam Hussein, as part of a strategy to destabilize the government
in Tehran that he was at war with.

In
recent years, as 
The
Intercept has reported
,
the MEK has poured millions of dollars into reinventing itself as a
moderate political group ready to take power in Iran if
Western-backed regime change ever takes place. To that end,
it 
lobbied
successfully
 to
be removed from the State Department’s 
list
of foreign terrorist organizations
 in
2012. The Iranian exiles achieved this over the apparent opposition
of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in part by paying 
a
long list of former U.S. officials
 hefty
speaking fees of between $10,000 to $50,000 for hymns of praise like
the one Bolton delivered last July.

But, according
to Ariane Tabatabai
,
a Georgetown University scholar, the “cult-like dissident group”
— whose married members were reportedly 
forced
to divorce and take a vow of lifelong celibacy
 —
“has no viable chance of seizing power in Iran.”

If
the current government is not Iranians’ first choice for a
government, the MEK is not even their last — and for good reason.
The MEK supported Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War. The
people’s discontent with the Iranian government at that time did
not translate into their supporting an external enemy that was firing
Scuds into Tehran, using chemical weapons and killing hundreds of
thousands of Iranians, including many civilians. Today, the MEK is
viewed negatively by most Iranians, who would prefer to maintain the
status quo than rush to the arms of what they consider a corrupt,
criminal cult.

Despite
such doubts that the MEK’s political wing, the National Council of
Resistance of Iran, is any more reliable than Ahmad Chalabi’s Iraqi
National Congress proved to be, spending lavishly on paid
endorsements has earned the group a bipartisan roster of Washington
politicians willing to sign up as supporters. At 
a
previous gala
,
in 2016, Bolton was joined in singing the group’s praises by
another former U.N. ambassador, 
Bill
Richardson
; a
former attorney general, 
Michael
Mukasey
; the
former State Department spokesperson 
P.J.
Crowley
; the
former Homeland Security adviser 
Frances
Townsend
; the
former Rep. 
Patrick
Kennedy
,
D-R.I.; and the former Vermont Gov. 
Howard
Dean
.
That Paris gala was hosted by 
Linda
Chavez
,
a former Reagan administration official.

At
a similar event this January, the backdrop behind former Speaker of
the House Newt Gingrich, as he praised MEK leader Maryam Rajavi, made
the aim of the group’s investment in American politicians clear.

Newt Gingrich, Auvers sur Oise, France 19/01/2018 - Maryam Rajavi and Newt Gingrich in a conference on January 19, 2018 in the office of NCRI, Auvers sur Oise, north of Paris speaks to support the uprising of the Iranian people for regime change. Newt Gingrich, Former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives said this is the opportunity that Iranian diaspora and people inside Iran have to get rid of this dictatorship. Rom/TME/SIPA (Sipa via AP Images)

Newt
Gingrich addressed a Paris conference of the Iranian exile group
known as the MEK in January.

 Photo:
Sipa via AP Images

Unsurprisingly,
leading figures from among the exile group’s Washington
followers have expressed delight over Bolton’s impending elevation
to the White House

Alireza Jafarzadeh


@A_Jafarzadeh

.@AmbJohnBolton has the right vision and great understanding of the whole region especially the threat from the Iranian regime and the need for a . https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/976948306927607810 

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Shirin Nariman@ShirinNariman

Congratulations to @AmbJohnBolton for the new post. Well deserved. https://twitter.com/orgiac/status/976950153469886464 

At
the group’s celebration of Nowruz, the Persian New Year, in Albania
on Tuesday, Rajavi was 
joined
on stage
 by
Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City.

Maryam Rajavi

@Maryam_Rajavi

Mr. Giuliani reiterated that unlike other countries in the region, there is an alternative to the ruling regime in Iran. Thus, its overthrow will lead to peace and tranquillity in a region that has been severely threatened by the clerical regime.

Although
the official announcement from the White House was not made until
Thursday, Giuliani told the group, to loud applause, that Bolton “is
going to be President Trump’s national security adviser.”

In
case there was any doubt among the exiles that Bolton might not
advise Trump to overthrow Iran’s government, Giuliani assured them
that “if anything, John Bolton has become more determined that
there needs to be regime change in Iran, that the nuclear agreement
needs to be burned, and that you need to be in charge of that
country.”

Moments
later, Giuliani led the crowd in chanting “regime change.”

Despite
the fact that Trump ran for office as a critic of the decision to
invade Iraq, Bolton still refuses to call the preemptive attack a
mistake.

That
position stunned even Fox News’s Tucker Carlson, during an
interview two weeks ago. After Carlson 
pointed
out
 that
Bolton had called for regime change in Iraq, Libya, Iran, and Syria,
and the first of those had been “a disaster,” Bolton disagreed,
saying, “I think your analysis is simple-minded, frankly.”

I
think the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, that military action, was a
resounding success,” Bolton told Carlson. The chaos that followed
in Iraq, he said, was caused by a poorly executed occupation that
ended too soon. On the bright side, Bolton said, the mistakes the
U.S. made in Iraq offered “lessons about what to do after a regime
is overthrown” in the future.

Top
Photo: At a 2017 celebration of Nowruz, the Persian New Year, in
Albania, Maryam Rajavi, the MEK leader and self-styled
president-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, met
international supporters including John Bolton, second from left, a
former United States
Ambassador
to the United Nations. Bolton was flanked by Pandeli Majko, a former
prime minister of Albania, far left, and David Muniz, the deputy
chief of the U.S. Embassy in Albania.

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

Bij het tweede weergegeven Twitterbericht hoort een video die ik niet kan overnemen, hier de link naar het originele artikel.

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

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

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

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

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

       en: ‘Protesten Iran opgezet door de VS en Israël

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

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

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

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

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

       en: ‘Washington uit op oorlog met Iran……

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

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

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

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

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

       en: ‘VS ambtenaren: Israël zoekt steun VS voor oorlog tegen Iran…….

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

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

       en: ‘VS ‘laat zien op vrede uit te zijn’ door dreiging Iran te vermorzelen……

      en: ‘Iran: wanneer heeft dit land voor het laatst een ander land aangevallen? 200 jaar geleden…..

Mijn excuus voor de af en toe belabberde weergave.