Text –Text– Text
Tillerson Out, Neocons In!
The Neocons are in, Rex Tillerson is out.
He didn’t quite fit.
An Exxon man with a Texas accent—who never ’shticked’ with the Jewish clique—was a mishap waiting to happen.
Pompeo’s now in, a Harvard boy, who touts the right script.
[Clip: “And, we are back on the air right now because we’ve just learned that President Trump has put out a tweet announcing that he has a new Secretary of State. Mike Pompeo, the CIA director, is in. Rex Tillerson, the current Secretary of State is out.”]
[Clip: “First let me also say thanks to FDD for hosting this, thanks to Clifford for inviting me here this morning. I look forward to a great conversation on lots of topics including certainly this very important topic, the threat the Islamic Republic of Iran presents to the United States.”]
No one’s losing any sleep over Iran’s ‘threat to the United States.’
In Israel, yeah………… but why get bogged down in someone else’s insomnia?
[Clip: “The President has come to view the threat from Iran as at the center of so much of the turmoil that bogs us down in lots of places in the Middle East, right?…whether it’s Lebanese Hezbollah, the threat it presents to Lebanon, to Israel.”]
Straight from the horse’s mouth.
Come on home, troops. In wars for IsraHell only the Goys die young.
Killer graphics means dead US soldiers.
[Clip: “Back in May, you were quoted as saying that one of the ways you keep the President engaged in your Intelligence briefings is with, quote, your words, ‘Killer Graphics.’” “Yes, absolutely.”]
Well, how ’bout this?
Here comes…a blast from the past. I mean, neocon Jews never retire.
[Clip: “President Trump tapping Mike Pompeo to replace Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State. But that leaves questions surrounding the future of the Iran deal to former Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman. Senator, uh you were never a big fan of the deal in the first place, and many people were surprised that the Trump administration didn’t take a harder line against it at its first, uh, so called bite at the apple. What do you think happens now?” “Well I, I think the President really was being pretty methodical. I mean he made it very clear, and uh,uh, I agree with him that the nuclear deal was a bad deal because it allows the Iranians to have nuclear weapons within ten years which is not a very long time in history, and it allows them to build missiles, to support terrorism, to carry out aggression throughout the region.”]
The same people who want to disarm Iran seems to want to disarm Americans too.
There will be NO nukes in ten years. Iran doesn’t want them, has said so many times, and is an original signatory of the Non Proliferation treaty—but Israel is not.
The deal obligates Iran to ratify in 2023 permission of inspections of its facilities by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which Iran is now voluntarily fulfilling.
As for ‘missiles,’ it’s not part of the deal.
Iran has every right to defend itself with conventional weapons.
‘Iran supports terrorism?’
The shoe’s on America’s foot. Ever heard of ISIS?
What we have here is a failure to communicate.
I mean, when neocon Jews and their shills lie, we’re not really upset, and nobody bats an eye.
What upsets us is that we just can’t believe them anymore.
God bless you for another powerhouse of a video.
Pompeo! Good God, he’s as much of a Muslim-hating, Arab-baiting, Iran hawk as there is.
And the Jews, especially in Israhell, believe he’s the second man in history to walk on water. Netanyahu called him personally to congratulate his appointment as the Secretary of State of the American Republic of Hell Aviv.
Pompeo’s been greasing the skids in the Neocon hawk think-tank circuit for a very long time. He’s Lieberman’s special friend.
And now, not only that, the CIA is about to be safely nested inside the State Department, rather than having to work from the outside through it.
Joe Lieberman, infamous neocon Iraq hawk and war cheerleader who firmly believes the world is a better place because of the Iraq War. We’re now passing the sorry 15th anniversary of that disastrous tragedy.
Any sane person knows that the criminal Iraq War is widely acknowledged as the biggest foreign policy blunder in 100 years, and the biggest mistake in US military history. Lieberman doesn’t care.
Lieberman has never counted the costs to the United States of pursuing Israeli objectives in the Middle East. He could care less about the incomprehensible devastation, destruction, and the millions of deaths of Iraqis, Afghanis, Syrians, and everywhere else the US has meddled in, or midwifed.
Joe is very concerned that not enough of other people’s children may die gruesome bloody deaths, get their arms and legs blown off, suffer permanent brain damage and suffer debilitating psychological disorders in the future for Joe Lieberman’s ideas about the country’s “role” in the world.
At 1:56 at the start of the Fox New clip with Lieberman, it briefly shows stock footage of the very unpleasant, human-sized walking Kansas ham Mike Pompeo, seen at the podium giving a talk at the ultra-Neocon American Enterprise Institute (AEI). AEI is thoroughly saturated with far more Jews than the demographically correct 3%.
The original footage in the Fox News clip is from this AEI jewel: CIA Director Mike Pompeo: Intelligence beyond 2018
He is gushingly introduced by Iran hawk and Jewess Danielle Pletka with the breathlessness of a smitten teenage girl.
She is the vice president of foreign and defense policy studies at AEI. A long-standing advocate of militaristic U.S. foreign and defense policies, she’s not only an Israel Firster – she’s a caricature of one.
I remember seeing an interview with her on some high random half-serious political website some years ago. It was supposed to be about US foreign policy, but she wouldn’t shut up about Israel and Iran.
She still hasn’t.
+BN’s right, old war-mongering Jews never fade from Congress, they just morph into something else even more slimy. I look at Lieberman today, and he looks a bit like a blood sucking lamprey with that mouth taking up most of his face.
Lieberman is a co-chair at the American Enterprise Institute, where, contrary to Pompeo’s personal policy of seldom doing public appearance, he’s made 4 appearances at the AEI. Lieberman is also chairman of the United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI).
UANI is an advocacy (pressure) organization closely tied to neoconservative and other “pro-Israel” factions that promotes a confrontational American stance towards Iran, particularly with respect to its nuclear program.
A program of the American Coalition Against Nuclear Iran, Inc., a 501(c)(3) organization, UANI’s aims include
1) Inform the public about the nature of the Iranian regime, including its desire and intent to possess nuclear weapons, as well as Iran’s role as a state sponsor of global terrorism, and a major violator of human rights at home and abroad;
2) Heighten awareness nationally and internationally about the danger that a nuclear-armed Iran poses to the region and the world;
3) Mobilize public support, utilize media outreach, and persuade our elected leaders to voice a robust and united American opposition to a nuclear Iran;
4) Lay the groundwork for effective US policies in coordination with European and other allies;
5) Persuade the regime in Tehran to desist from its quest for nuclear weapons, while striving not to punish the Iranian people, and;
6) Promote efforts that focus on vigorous national and international, social, economic, political and diplomatic measures.
Who funds United Against Iran? Why, none other than Sheldon Adelson.
The top donors to UANI are a pair of trusts associated with the billionaire Thomas Kaplan and a family foundation operated by Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson and his wife Miriam.
Eli Clifton writes: Both Thomas Kaplan and Sheldon Adelson have family ties to Israel. Adelson gives in concert with his Israeli-born wife, Miriam. “I am not Israeli,” Sheldon Adelson said at a 2010 event, speaking about the founding of Israel Hayom, a right-wing newspaper he owns in Israel.
“Standing beside Miriam, however, Adelson went on: “All we care about is being good Zionists, being good citizens of Israel, because even though I am not Israeli born, Israel is in my heart.”
“The Kaplan trust New Generations is associated with Kaplan and his wife, Dafna Recanati Kaplan, the daughter of influential Israeli investor Leon Recanati (Leon’s late uncle Raphael, an Israeli-American businessman, was himself a shipping magnate).
Both sets of major donors raise questions about UANI’s professed non-partisanship.
Now we know who owns Pompeo. Now through Pompeo and Trump, united with Adelson and Netanyahu against Iran, Lieberman hopes to get another little war on, because Iraq worked out so great.
In the meantime, in a National Priorities Project email newsletter, the write: 15 years to the day after the United States invaded Iraq, there is still no end in sight. And we are still spending million every hour on war.
According to Brown University’s Costs of War project, the United States has spent.6 trillion dollars on the counterterror wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan and elsewhere, and we’re on the hook for more than trillion in additional care for our veterans of these wars - bringing the total costs of war to.6 trillion so far.
Today, National Priorities Project at IPS has launched a new, improved version of our live costs of war counter in partnership with Brown University’s Costs of War project, to show Americans how much we’re really spending on these never-ending wars.
·.76 million per hour for military costs of wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and elsewhere
·.05 million per hour for interest on war debts since 9/11
·.28 million per hour on care for veterans of the 9/11 wars
·.99 million per hour for counterterrorism-related Homeland Security
There’s a lot of busy-ness now going on among the warmongers regarding the Middle East.
Not the least of which is Trump is now running his version of a fire-distressed property sale. He is attempting to sell off US-occupied Syria to Grand Prince Moshe bin Schlomo of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for billion.
Trump made his sales pitch Moshe bin Schlomo with “Killer Graphics”.
( nytimes.com/2018/03/20/us/politics/saudi-crown-prince-arrives-at-white-house-to-meet-with-trump.html )
Mint Press News:
Trump’s Latest “Deal”: Sell Syria to Saudi Arabia for Billion
It’s no secret that Saudi Arabia has funneled weapons, fighters, and funds into Syria, now Trump is looking to sell off chunks of the embattled nation to the Saudi monarchy, making Saudi Arabia de facto arsonist and firefighter.
WASHINGTON DC – This week, as Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MBS) meets with top White House officials, reports have surfaced that Syria will be a key part of foreign policy discussions between the Trump administration and Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler.
According to the Washington Post, President Trump – in a bid to remove the estimated 4,000 U.S. soldiers illegally stationed in Syria – has offered to remove U.S. troops from Syria’s occupied northeast if Saudi Arabia agrees to pay billion to “rebuild” and “stabilize” the areas the U.S. coalition and its proxies took from Daesh (ISIS) last year.
As the Post noted, the plan is meant to allow Trump to minimize an overt U.S. military presence in the region while accomplishing his postwar goal “to prevent Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his Russian and Iranian partners from claiming the areas, or the Islamic State from regrouping.”
The Trump administration’s stated goals for America’s presence in Syria betrays the fact that the mission originally professed by the U.S. was the defeat of Daesh.
As the threat posed by Daesh has all but passed, administration officials “have convinced Trump that the U.S. military cannot remove its troops from northern Syria in part because of Iran,” suggesting that the U.S. presence in Syria is now relegated to containing Iran as well as the long-standing goal of removing Syria’s president from power.
The strategy of Iran containment through occupying Syria has been clear for some time and has been stated openly by U.S. ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley and the now former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.
Last September, Haley remarked, “the [U.S.] efforts in Syria have been remarkable. And I can tell you, Iran is not going to be in charge, and Iran is not going to have any sort of leadership in that situation to where they could do more harm.”
She also stated that the U.S. is not “going to be satisfied until we see a strong and stable Syria. And that is not with Assad in place.”
Then, in January, Tillerson told an audience at Stanford University that only “the departure of Assad through the UN-led Geneva process will create the conditions for a durable peace within Syria and security along the borders” and that “US disengagement from Syria would provide Iran with the opportunity to further strengthen its own position in Syria.”
Given past statements of top officials in his administration and his often-stated desire to share the burden of nation-building with U.S. allies, Trump is now offering Saudi Arabia control of the Syrian territories the U.S. has illegally occupied, but at a hefty price.
According to U.S. officials cited by the Post, when Trump first floated this deal to Saudi Arabia’s King Salman, it was positively received, leading the president to believe that “he had a deal” with the monarch which would keep Syria’s oil-rich northeast in the hands of U.S. allies and out of the hands of the Syrian government his administration seeks to topple.
However, Saudi officials have reportedly sought to lower the price and have questioned the billion price tag, but not the deal itself. MBS’ meetings in Washington this week will likely reveal if Trump’s latest “deal” is a success.
The endgame is the partition of Syria
Now, for ominous, jingoist, warmongering propaganda to threaten Syria, Israhell military censor has decided to release classified military information on an IDF bombing raid “Operation Soft Melody” on an alleged Syrian nuclear reactor still in the building stage, and the Israeli Jewmedia is running it 24/7 at full bore.
Syria is a non-nuclear weapon state party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and has a Comprehensive Nuclear Safeguards Agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Nothing prevented Syria from developing nuclear research for peaceful purposes, if that’s what they were doing. IF the destroyed building was a reactor facility under construction, so far as I know, Syria was not obligated to inform the IAEA until after a certain stage of construction.
All photographic evidence and intelligence for the existence said nuclear reactor came clandestinely from Israeli and US intelligence services, and are of dubious provenance. There is actually no connective proof that the photographs are that of the alleged Syrian nuclear reactor.
A major clue that this has to be a Bush White House CIA-Mossad fairy tale from 2007 is the fact that neither Mossad nor military intelligence, nor any other covert or military intelligence source for that matter had any idea that Syria had been building the alleged nuclear reactor for 5 or 6 years, and now claim it as a huge “intelligence failure”.
The US military was just next door in occupied Iraq, “Mad Dog” Mattis and his itchy trigger finger was gleefully bombing threatening targets close to the Syrian border, such as a large traditional, tribal Arab wedding party (see Mukaradeeb wedding party massacre), and Mossad, especially close to some Kurdish tribes and their networks of coopted Arab tribesmen, was crawling all over the place.
A sand flea can’t pass wind in the Syrian desert but what the Mossad knows about it and the IDF bombs it. But, for five or six years including the post-9/11 Desert Shield ramping up for the Operation Desert Storm invasion of Iraq, they missed an alleged “nuclear reactor” under construction with the alleged assistance of the North Koreans in the middle of a large, uninhabited Syrian desert patch abutting the Euphrates?
As Megyn Kelly said to Putin, “Awwwww, Caaaaam’on!
-South Front: ISRAEL OFFICIALLY CONFIRMS STRIKE ON ‘SYRIAN NUCLEAR REACTOR’ IN 2007 (VIDEO)
On March 21, the Israel Defense Forces shared details of an airstrike, which destroyed an alleged nuclear reactor under construction in the Syrian province of Deir Ezzor back in 2007. This was the first time when Israel officially acknowledged carrying out the secret raid.
“During the night of September 5th and 6th, 2007, the Israeli Air Force destroyed a nuclear facility in its last stages of construction in the Deir ez-Zor region in Syria, 280 miles north-east of Damascus,” the military said in a press release. “Four F-16 jets eliminated a nuclear threat not only to Israel, but to the entire region.”
The attack was monitored from the aerial war room by all key political and military officials at the time, including Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
“Two fighter jets, F-16I and F-15I left the base at 10:30 pm and flew low to stay undetected. The whole operation took four hours,” the Israeli military noted claiming that the nuclear facility was “damaged beyond repair.”
“The operation was deemed a success by the Chief of the General Staff. The nuclear facility was destroyed and an escalation in the region prevented.”
Haaretz: Who’s Hiding Israeli Air Force Participation in Major Exercise With UAE and U.S.?
It’s unclear why Israel is not mentioned on the promotional website of the annual Iniohos exercise with the U.S., UAE, Greece, Britain, Cyprus and Italy
Jewish News Syndicate: Jewish groups weigh in on Pompeo for secretary of state [They love him. Why not? Adelson surely put him there].
Contrasting Mike Pompeo with Rex Tillerson, who reportedly opposed U.S. recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
Major American Jewish organizations are pleased by the nomination of CIA director Mike Pompeo to succeed Rex Tillerson as U.S. secretary of state, and some are expressing hope that Pompeo will reverse Tillerson’s recent decision to side with the PLO in a lawsuit by victims of terrorism.
Pompeo “has had close ties to the Jewish community and is a strong supporter of the U.S.-Israel relationship,” Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman and CEO of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, told JNS.
“We look forward to working with him on the many international issues and challenges he will be addressing. We hope he will review the State Department’s position on the terror victims’ lawsuits.”
Sarah Stern, president of the pro-Israel advocacy group EMET (Endowment for Middle East Truth), said she worked with Pompeo when he was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives.
“He genuinely appreciates Israel’s unique role as America’s only reliable, democratic ally in one of the most volatile regions in the world,” Stern told JNS.
She also pointed out that it was Pompeo, together with Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), who exposed the fact that the Obama administration signed a series of secret side agreements with Iran that gave Tehran additional benefits from the nuclear agreement.
[”Secret side agreements” is a big fat hyperbolic Pompeo lie. It is a well-known fact that the Iran Deal, which succeeded in curtailing the Iranian nuclear program (among other benefits for the US), had certain negotiated conditions.
One of which required refunding the money, plus interest, collected by the US in a failed arms deal signed just before the 1979 fall of Iran’s last monarch, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.
The other “secret side agreement” part that wasn’t except in Pompeo and Cotton’s busy little minds was finding out in a discussion with the IAEA that the agency was temporarily stymied on how to proceed closing a separate investigation into claims that Iran was working on secret nuclear weapon research from 2003.-Kj]
Stern said she was “deeply disappointed” by the State Department’s decision to side with the PLO, which is currently being sued by terror victims under the terms of the Anti-Terrorism Act.
The department recently submitted a brief in the Sokolow vs. PLO case, urging the Supreme Court to decline to hear the suit, primarily on technical grounds.
EMET will urge the new secretary of state to reverse that position, she said.
In a statement to JNS, B’nai B’rith International said it is “encouraged by Mike Pompeo’s record of support for the U.S.-Israel relationship,” and “shares his concern about the Iranian nuclear threat and his view of the need for continued pressure on Iran.”
Regarding the lawsuit against the PLO, B’nai B’rith said: “The Anti-Terrorism Act is intended to deter terrorist acts against the U.S. and to give recourse to victims who seek justice. B’nai B’rith supports victims of terror and their families.”
Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, told JNS that in his view, President Donald Trump “has two key foreign-policy challenges he wants to tackle: North Korea—with China an associated challenge—and Iran.”
With Pompeo as secretary of state, “it seems the U.S. will actively try to deal with both. This is a big development.”
Israeli Jews are confident that Pompeo will always come down on the right side of things — as long as it’s Hell Aviv’s.
All those who think Israel’s very recent de-classified admission of the 2007 clandestine bombing of Syria contains the warning, ‘Iran, you’re next,’ raise your hands?
Dear Eileen Kuch,
The Senate is currently Republican majority (barely), and Mitch McConnell is the Senate Majority leader.
Schumer, the Democrat Iran war hawk, is the Senate Minority leader.
The Senate is currently composed of 51 Republicans, 47 Democrats, and 2 independents, both of whom caucus with the Democrats (total, 99 senators). John McCain is on medical leave of absence from the Senate.
Rand Paul’s filibuster gambit to sink Pompeo and Haspel’s confirmation could work. A majority of 99 is 49.5 senators, so a numerical majority is rounded up to 50, not 51, because of McCain’s absence from the floor.
In other words, 50-49 senate votes in favor of Pompeo or Haspel respectively would confirm either or both of them.
God help Rand get at least 50 votes on his side for both nominations.
Hand in glove with the abrupt publication of the Israeli air strike on the alleged Syrian nuclear facility in 2007, underneath the mask of the Salisbury saga, come to find out, Hell Aviv has been bustling their military bustle right along in a stacked series of joint US-Israeli military drills the past six months or so.
They didn’t need a Tillerson, with no fervor to bomb Iran or further maul Syria, to rain on their parade, they need a Pompeo!
-Haaretz: Israeli Military Drill Simulates Multi-front War - With Russia Intervening Over Syria
An IDF officer said the scenario simulated a moment when ‘Russia made trouble,’ a massive cyber warfare attack, enemy missile strikes and hundreds of Israelis killed
The army conducted an exercise this week which simulated a multi-front war in which Russia intervened to prevent Israel from attacking Syria.
The scenarios explored in this exercise included fighting that killed hundreds of Israelis, terrorist penetrations of Israeli towns and cyberattacks.
The IDF also concluded two other exercises this week – a joint exercise with the United States, known as Juniper Cobra, which focuses on aerial defense, and a Home Front Command exercise that simulated various emergency scenarios.
The latter included activating missing warning sirens in certain parts of the country.
Israel and the US-Nato aren’t planning on any direct or proxy wars with Lebanon, Syria and Iran, or anything like that.
In the meantime, the Houthis and factional Yemen army allies, have managed again to knock down another million Royal Saudi Air Force warplane with a low tech, low cost, re-engineered “antique” Soviet made missile hauled out of old military arsenals in territory under Houthi control.
-South Front (Video): On March 21, the Yemeni Air Defense Force [allied to the Houthis] hit an F-15 warplane of the Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF) with an “air defense missile” over the central province of Saada, according to the Yemeni al-Masirah TV.
A video released by the Houthis media wing clearly showed an unidentified warplane being hit by what appears to be a Soviet made R-27T missile. The Saudi-led collation revealed last November that the he Houthis had managed to turn Soviet-made R-27T air-to-air missiles into ground-to-air missiles.
The R-27T is guided by infrared homing, and has the “fire and forget” feature, which makes it easy to convert it into a ground-to-air missile. The R-27T’s range is 70km when it’s launched from air. Nonetheless, the missile will have a shorter range when the missile it is launched from the ground.
The Saudi-led coalition has not commented on the incident yet, likely because the warplane managed to return to its home airbase or crashed in an area under the coalition control.
This was the second time when the Houthis announced they hit an F-15 of the RSAF over Yemen this year. On January 8, the Houthis hit an F-15 over the Yemeni city of Sanaa.
At the very same time, Netanyahu’s new best friend, the Clown Prince Moshe bin Schlomo, coming in by way of other than the White House front doors on a low-key visit (perhaps the doorway needs to be widened to accommodate MbS’ widening girth), still found his way into the Oval Office to talk with Trump in order to go over their Yemeni blood deals.
-Al Jazeera: Saudi crown prince meets Trump at the White House
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has met the US president at the White House, with Donald Trump using the encounter for an unusual photo opportunity.
He displayed large cards to illustrate the benefits of arms being sold to Riyadh.
But rights groups say those sales should not be made to Saudi Arabia, which is leading a campaign in Yemen against the Houthi rebels.
Dear Brother Nat,
May you be blessed with pure knowledge from God, peace, and prosperity.
Please excuse this off-topic message. Alert-Alert-Alert
From Bloomberg Media:
“YouTube will ban videos that promote or link to websites selling firearms and accessories, including bump stocks, which allow a semi-automatic rifle to fire faster. Additionally, YouTube said it will prohibit videos with instructions on how to assemble firearms. The video site, owned by Alphabet Inc.’s Google, has faced intense criticism for hosting videos about guns, bombs and other deadly weapons.”
Friends, RJN Family, Please Look at This:
“Additionally, YouTube said it will prohibit videos with instructions on how to assemble firearms.”
Tyranny is exponentiating, they’re moving faster now, that is a shift, not just going after the guns, but going AFTER KNOWLEDGE ITSELF.
The following regions/countries have fallen to the anti-gunners:
All predominantly white/English speaking.
The United States is next, we have to move on this. Only a banana-boat totalitarian dictatorship would “ban” knowledge and self-help videos for the do-it-yourselfers.
We are the leaders, we cannot allow ourselves or our brethren around the world to fall into oppression. Without the weapons, in private individual hands, decentralized democracy and real freedom will dry-up like the husk of a poisoned insect.
The Clouds are falling. We must bring the Clouds down to earth. Download everything from the Cloud and encrypt it.
Get the engineering-grade weapon diagrams. Get everything, go, do it right now. There’s not a second to lose!
The US Mail system is being halted nation-wide because of the Austin bombing, and very nasty protocols are being implemented due to that, and the recent school shootings.
Our opponents say, “Strike while the iron is hot.” “Don’t let a good tragedy go to waste”, as they push and push and push to get every last civilian weapon away from us.
These are our enemies, they are all saying the same thing, and they are all lying.
Freedom is in your hands, it’s a choice, it’s a lifestyle, you have to grasp it now, get it now before we are all toothless, disarmed, and in chains!
God bless you all. I love you, good luck on your mission.
Last November, Gareth Porter published an excellent 2 part investigative report exclusively for Consortium News rounding up technical and witness evidence underlying the peculiarities, falsehoods, and intelligence chicanery surrounding Israel’s 2007 bombing attack on Syria’s so-called nuclear reactor.
Consortium News: Israel’s Ploy Selling a Syrian Nuke Strike
November 18, 2017
Exclusive: The Iraq WMD fiasco wasn’t the only time political pressure twisted U.S. intelligence judgments. In 2007, Israel sold the CIA on a dubious claim about a North Korean nuclear reactor in the Syrian desert…
By Gareth Porter
In September 2007, Israeli warplanes bombed a building in eastern Syria that the Israelis claimed held a covert nuclear reactor that had been built with North Korean assistance.
Seven months later, the CIA released an extraordinary 11-minute video and mounted press and Congressional briefings that supported that claim.
But nothing about that alleged reactor in the Syrian desert turns out to be what it appeared at the time.
The evidence now available shows that there was no such nuclear reactor, and that the Israelis had misled George W. Bush’s administration into believing that it was in order to draw the United States into bombing missile storage sites in Syria.
Other evidence now suggests, moreover, that the Syrian government had led the Israelis to believe wrongly that it was a key storage site for Hezbollah missiles and rockets.
The International Atomic Agency’s top specialist on North Korean reactors, Egyptian national Yousry Abushady, warned top IAEA officials in 2008 that the published CIA claims about the alleged reactor in the Syrian desert could not possibly have been true.
In a series of interviews in Vienna and by phone and e-mail exchanges over several months Abushady detailed the technical evidence that led him to issue that warning and to be even more confident about that judgment later on.
And a retired nuclear engineer and research scientist with many years of experience at Oak Ridge National Laboratory has confirmed a crucial element of that technical evidence.
Published revelations by senior Bush administration officials show, moreover, that principal U.S. figures in the story all had their own political motives for supporting the Israeli claim of a Syrian reactor being built with North Korean help.
Vice President Dick Cheney hoped to use the alleged reactor to get President George W. Bush to initiate U.S. airstrikes in Syria in the hope of shaking the Syrian-Iranian alliance.
And both Cheney and then CIA Director Michael Hayden also hoped to use the story of a North Korean-built nuclear reactor in Syria to kill a deal that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was negotiating with North Korea on its nuclear weapons program in 2007-08.
Mossad Chief’s Dramatic Evidence
In April 2007 the chief of Israel’s Mossad foreign intelligence agency, Meir Dagan, presented Cheney, Hayden and National Security Adviser Steven Hadley with evidence of what he said was a nuclear reactor being constructed in eastern Syria with the help of the North Koreans.
Dagan showed them nearly a hundred hand-held photographs of the site revealing what he described as the preparation for the installation of a North Korean reactor and claimed that it was only a few months from being operational.
The Israelis made no secret of their desire to have a U.S. airstrike destroy the alleged nuclear facility. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert called President Bush immediately after that briefing and said, “George, I’m asking you to bomb the compound,” according to the account in Bush’s memoirs.
Cheney, who was known to be a personal friend of Olmert, wanted to go further. At White House meetings in subsequent weeks, Cheney argued forcefully for a U.S. attack not only on the purported reactor building but on Hezbollah weapons storage depots in Syria.
Then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who participated in those meetings, recalled in his own memoirs that Cheney, who was also looking for an opportunity to provoke a war with Iran, hoped to “rattle Assad sufficiently so as to end his close relationship with Iran” and “send a powerful warning to the Iranians to abandon their nuclear ambitions.”
Syrian War Report – March 21, 2018: Three Chemical Weapons Attacks Are Prevented
Haaretz (excerpted): Israeli Defense Chief Regrets Clearing 2007 Syria Nuclear Reactor Strike for Publication
Israel claimed credit for the 2007 attack, 11 years after it was carried out to stop Syria from developing a nuclear capacity with North Korean help
Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman expressed regret on Wednesday for approving publication of the details of Israel’s attack in 2007 on a Syrian nuclear reactor.
Eleven years after the attack took place, Israel for the first time officially confirmed it was behind the strike.
Speaking with reporters, Lieberman said that, in light of “the war over credit” for the attack and “the wave of mutual defamation” in Israel over the aerial attack on the reactor, he was sorry that he had allowed the details to clear Israeli military censorship.
Lieberman spoke of an Israeli media circus, which he said put the decision taken in September 2007 to destroy the reactor in an embarrassing light.
This does an injustice to the pilots who carried out the operation and the staff of the Mossad espionage agency and Military Intelligence who obtained the information about the reactor, he said.
“People have breached every barrier and are simply freely releasing information some of which could cause serious harm to Israel’s security,” Lieberman said.
The defense minister, who will be wrapping up a visit to Africa on Thursday, said by phone that on his return to Israel, he intends to reexamine military censorship policy regarding books written by former public officials.
The defense minister expressed appreciation for the work of the military censor’s office, including its preparation for the release of the material on the bombing of the Syrian nuclear reactor.
His decision to release the information for publication was based on the professional opinions of top officials in the Israeli army and the Mossad, he added.
Lieberman, who was a member of the security cabinet at the time, also rejected out of hand a claim that had been made by Ehud Barak, the defense minister when the reactor was destroyed, that the atmosphere at the security cabinet meetings during the period were “hysterical and apocalyptic.”
There was in fact an atmosphere of level-headedness and responsibility, Lieberman said, and the prime minister at the time, Ehud Olmert, was restrained and functioned well.
The former heads of the Mossad and Military Intelligence at the time of the attack are now warring over which intelligence organization deserves the most credit for uncovering the Syrian nuclear program.
Tamir Pardo, who was the head of the Mossad in 2007, said on Wednesday that it was only because of the Mossad that Israel knew about the reactor. He also said its late discovery was a “thunderous failure.”
Jewish back-biting, blame-gaming, grand-standing, hysterical Israeli media circus so intense that even the stoic, unblinking, hard-bitten Russian Israeli Avigdor Lieberman is sorry he cleared military censorship of the Israeli strike on Syria for publication.
What’s that German word? Oh, ummm — schadenfreude.
Crikey! McMaster Is Out…Bolton Is In!
What a Ménage à Bozos Dangereux in the 3-Ring Trumpean Swamp-Monster Circus.
We’re in trouble.
On the other hand, there are a lot of people and states around the world who have sane heads on their shoulders, and who have grown older and wiser to Jewmerica’s ways after 15 years of the endless Global War on Terra (not to mention for the past 70 years). RJN family has become a lot more smarter, informed, and more aware, too, thanks to the tireless labors of +BN.
Not the least of which among the “woke” is a “resurgent” Russia and the nations, parties and secular, political and religious groups of people of every kind, loosely allied to or in sympathy with the Middle East Axis of Resistance, who have now gained invaluable experience and wisdom after 15 years at the cost of much blood, sweat, tears by millions of people, and are developing a variety of counter-strategies, including epic spiritual warfare. Like this.
Palestinian refugees pledge to return home with non-violent marches and Palestinian and allied organizers are growing a movement called The Great Return March”. The idea is catching fire across the entire region.
The march comes at a time of the recent assault launched on UNRWA by the Trump administration, threatening the refugees’ only lifeline. UNRWA provides basic needs including food, education and health services. Palestinians know the only alternative now means a slow and painful death.
Many Palestinians believe there is an Israeli-American plan to liquidate the whole Palestinian cause - a plan that started with US recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and taking the city’s status off the negotiation table.
The idea of the march is to promote the one-state solution.
Last month, youth activists called on social media users to participate in setting up tents near the borders in preparation for the march. The tent has long been symbolic of the refugees’ plight.
Naturally, Israel cut off social media to the organizers, and probably the US did too.
To maintain the populist nature, and help prevent it from being hijacked by political factions or, worse, infiltrated by Mossad and Shin Bet for provocation purposes, Palestinian refugees will be marching home by families, not by political parties.
Poetic symmetry in my mind.
Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were brutally and viciously shoved off of their land by the family at the bloody hands of gangs of Zionist Nationalist Jewish criminal terrorist gangs, taking only Palestine in their hearts. Now the refugees, and their children, and their children’s children, and their children will be making the multi-generational march of families.
The Jew cannot point the finger at someone else in accusation because all of the criminal terrorist gangs, Irgun, Stern Gang, etc were Jews only, and the other Jewish militias were Jews only, too.
And now, the Palestinian “terrorists” are making plans for the Great Return March by families armed only with Palestinian flags of potentially of tens, or even hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who plan to camp in tents right along the border by. And, what if pro-Palestinian Arabs from across the region march with them? What about pro-Palestinian one-state Israeli Jewish supporters?
Israel doesn’t know what to do about this.
The “most moral army in the world,” the IDF, has no operational plans for dealing with a peaceful mass march walking in the way of Ghandi. So, they’ll resort to what they always do, aided and abetted by Jewmerica of provoking and escalating their violence against the Palestinians before the march date, or else just fire on the masses of unarmed Palestinian marchers and the world be damned, but that would not settle well with the rest of the Arab world, either.
The Great March Home symbolizes the end of the Israel-Palestinian war and the 70 year struggle for the dead and buried two-state solution.
It symbolizes the start of the Palestinian’s struggle against military occupation for a one-state solution and civil rights.
The Trumpean White House is gearing up to go to war.
Curt Couchman of Defense Priorities sent out their email newsletter today.
Defense Priorities promotes essentially a national-patriotic ‘paleoconservative’ defensive US military doctrine approach to national security. They aren’t pro-Russian nor pro-Iran, they’re pro-America, and don’t preach the Israel-first religion.
Here is his first leading issue today. It was probably written prior to the announcement that Bolton the Dangerous Clown is now Trump’s national security advisor:
[Quote] Iraq after 15 years: Washington’s mistake
President George W. Bush launched a war of choice in Iraq 15 years ago Tuesday. Life for Iraqis went from bad under Saddam Hussein to far worse.
The alternative to brutal dictatorship wasn’t western democracy; it was sectarian, ethnic, and tribalism-fueled chaos and civil war, turbocharged by other regional actors predictably pursuing their own conflicting interests.
But Americans became safer, or at least they would have if President Obama hadn’t botched it by pulling U.S. forces too soon, right? Please.
Yes, the execution was flawed in many serious ways, but from the start, it was a strategic failure and the triumph of hubris over prudence and humility.
Like Hussein’s iron rule, the surge tamped down the violence, but it was never going to be sustainable. The Middle East’s political problems don’t have external military solutions.
Tragically, 4,540 U.S. military fatalities (plus at least 191 American contractors), 32 thousand Americans wounded, millions of displaced Iraqis, hundreds of thousands dead, and trillions of taxpayer dollars later, and the Middle East is worse, not better.
If Saddam were still alive, neighboring countries could easily contain and deter him — and he would have almost certainly continued to help balance Iran. Huge costs, negative benefits.
Back home, the architects of the Iraq War are doing fine. As they make the same dangerous arguments about North Korea, they continue to be taken seriously despite, at best, being very, very wrong. Few have even been decent enough to express remorse. Britain has investigated where fault lies. Maybe President Trump should seek accountability here as well.” [End Quote]
When Couchman says “Britain has investigated where the fault lies” for the Iraq War, he’s talking about the Chilcot report following a 7-year investigation described in an opinion piece at The Hill written by William S. Smith, the managing director and a research fellow at the Center for the Study of Statesmanship at the Catholic University of America.
We desperately need statesmanship more than ever in US foreign relations, not a bunch of Israel-worshipping pirates and marauder business thugs following the political theories of the Kehillah Mobsters and their shotgun diplomacy.
As in, fire a shotgun to kill it, see what happens, and then deal with the fallout. That’s our foreign policy in a nutshell.
Or call it spaghetti diplomacy. Throw spaghetti at a wall. Whatever sticks to the wall is fine.
It’s nothing new, that’s been US foreign policy for over a hundred years.
And we need to get away from political appointees for the top diplomats at the US State Department, appointed by the president from among his business cronies and rich party supporters to return some favors, and move to professionalize the whole organization with trained career diplomats from top to bottom.
We need to do it before we wind up with an arrogant, politically ambitious, neurotic, belligerent, untrained “fishwife” (I love that word) of an unqualified appointee ambassador to the UN, armed with the mentality of a toddler scribbling in crayon all over the walls of the UN, chattering nonsense a mile a minute.
The Hill: 15 years after the invasion of Iraq, still zero accountability for the war
Today marks the 15th anniversary of arguably the most ignominious act in the history of American foreign policy: the invasion of Iraq. It devastated the lives of millions of innocents and inflicted terrible casualties on America’s military and their families. One should not mince words. The decision to invade will forever tarnish America.
Saddam Hussein may have been a loathsome dictator, but he was not a threat to the United States. He possessed no weapons of mass destruction and had no role in 9/11.
The argument that the Iraq invasion was a necessary “Phase Two” in the “War on Terror” is laughable. The invasion of Iraq was a reckless war of choice made by belligerent policymakers with imperialistic personalities and opaque motives.
Yet, there has been no reckoning for these policymakers. If they had been physicians who had killed hundreds of thousands of patients due to malpractice, they would have lost their license to practice medicine. But the political architects of the Iraq invasion have suffered no ignominy.
They continue to advise presidential candidates, staff prestigious think tanks, offer their opinions on Fox News, and appear on the opinion pages of America’s newspapers. They blame the catastrophe in Iraq on President Obama or the intelligence community or the military but accept no blame themselves. They offer no apologies to the hundreds of thousands whose lives were destroyed by their decisions.
Great Britain, to its credit, sensed the depravity of the Iraq War and in 2009 launched an “Iraq Inquiry,” an exhaustive seven-year investigation led by Sir John Chilcot.
Unlike some investigations of the Iraq War in the United States that attempted to point blame at anyone other than the political class who actually launched the war, the Chilcot inquiry took for granted that Prime Minister Tony Blair and his senior advisers bore the primary responsibility for the disaster.
The Chilcot report destroyed the public reputation of Blair, who infamously sent President Bush a note in September of 2002 assuring him that “I will be with you, whatever.” In the British press, Blair came to be known as Bush’s “poodle.”
Yet, a reader of the Chilcot report can feel some sympathy for Blair. He rightly believed that the United Kingdom’s relationship with the United States was its most important alliance and that public opposition to Bush’s policy on Iraq would preclude British input on the direction of that policy. Blair’s advice to Bush, while ignored, was also generally sound.
What is most disconcerting for an American about the Chilcot report is not the advice of Blair, but the actions of Bush.
The report makes clear that Bush was going to invade Iraq no matter what allies advised, no matter what the international community thought, no matter what the weapons inspectors found, no matter that there was “no evidence of any Iraqi involvement with the attacks on the U.S. or active links to Al Qaeda,” and no matter what ambiguities were contained in the intelligence on weapons of mass destruction.
This was rash bellicosity, and no one has been held to account for it.
While Blair has had his political reckoning, the political reckoning for Bush and the team who engineered the invasion has yet to come.
When the Chilcot report was released in 2016, a spokesman released a defiant statement: “President Bush continues to believe the whole world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power.” Given the almost unfathomable death and destruction unleashed in Iraq and elsewhere that began with the invasion, this continued defiance reveals a staggering moral obtuseness. It is deeply offensive.
[And, Joe Lieberman said the same thing, that the world is better off because of the Iraq War reported by MSNBC in an interview-Kj].
Given that the architects of the Iraq disaster are still around and many of them are now pining for confronting Iran, Syria, Russia and others, there is all the more reason for an American version of the Chilcot inquiry. The great republics of history all dissolved in excess war. If the United States is going to take that route, we should at least do it with eyes open about who led us down this road.
Defense Priorities’ unabashedly old fashioned Americanist public policy national defense and ‘balance of power’ foreign relations philosophy closely align with the original thought of America’s founding fathers as expressed by President John Q Adams.
The think-tank falls right into the Pat Buchanan/Ron Paul “Old Right” partisan camp — the “America First” of Taft Republicans (Lindberg, General Smedley Butler, and Southern Democrats; JFK in many ways was the spiritual heir of Old Right Democrat allies who attempted to stop the war that JFK wound up fighting in as well.)
The original “America First” Old Right anti-imperialist, anti-aggressive war, non-interventionist movement stood for strong military sized for defense of territorial integrity.
They rejected uber-Neocon Henry R. Luce’s Big Government megalomaniac visions of an American Empire (euphemistically called “The American Century”) advocated positioning the US to advantage on the world stage after WWII and the collapse of existing Great Power empires to build itself up as one of two of the world’s new super powers.
The American Century idea embraced hegemonic wars across the face of the globe, the overthrow of numerous sovereign governments, predatory war capitalism and imperial piracy and brigandage to justify fuzzy, undefined, ever-present slimy pretexts of “US (read Israel’s) shifting interests” abroad.
This generally sums up the New Deal Neocon Republicans who supported FDR’s efforts to get the US into WWII, their affection for Big Government and imperial adventures abroad, and who defeated the Old Right Movement trying to prevent it all.
Anyone remember the Koch brothers during the Obama elections and administrations?
Charles Koch didn’t support Trump in 2016, and doesn’t support him now.
Allies of both Rand Paul and Koch joined up to form the Defense Priorities Foundation in 2016, essentially a pro-Constitution paleo-conservative without the belligerent jingoism and militarism, aligned approximately center-right/center-left. Charles Koch, and to a lesser degree, his brother, is a key backer behind the scenes supporting the efforts of the Defense Priority Foundation and its political action arm.
The Koch brothers were born and raised in Witchita, Kansas.
Despite living in a wealthy Christian family of traditional Midwest values and what was then conservative Middle America Taft Republicans in opposition to the “moderate Republicans” of the liberal East Coast Establishment, aka the Deep State, the Koch brothers came up the hard way and paid their dues.
At their father’s insistence that the boys work like they were poor (no “rich white privilege” there), they worked their way through college and university. They built their Koch industrial businesses from the ground up like he did. With their economic libertarian leanings, they also naturally align as anti-war.
Charles Koch formally identifies as a libertarian.
Defense Priorities: Our Mission
To inform citizens, thought leaders, and policy makers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure American security.
Politico wrote (2016):
Sen. Rand Paul’s vision of a less militaristic foreign policy got little traction in the GOP primaries, but some of his key backers are joining forces with associates of billionaire Charles Koch in a fresh effort to steer Washington away from interventions in overseas wars.
They’re launching a think tank, the Defense Priorities Foundation, that seeks to elevate national security policies that are decidedly out of the mainstream of Republican — and even some Democratic — foreign policy thinking, featuring a significantly greater reluctance to assert military force or even impose sanctions on nations such as North Korea.
The related Defense Priorities Initiative, meanwhile, is designed as the organization’s advocacy arm, which will seek to lobby Congress.
Among the architects of the nonprofit are William Ruger, a Navy Reserve officer who is the vice president for research and policy at the Charles Koch Institute.
The institute is backed by the billionaire businessman and donor, who along with his brother David has poured millions into conservative political causes that champion lower taxes and lighter regulations.
The dreaded Koch brothers that the “progressive” Democrat war hawks hate with a passion, alongside the neocons Republicans, have quietly gone on the anti-war, anti-interventionist path through Defense Priorities.
The Defense Priorities think tank has a good middle of the road approach to national defense and foreign policy and worth reading through.
Bolton was a prime architect behind Operation Iraqi Freedom, to America’s misfortune.
Quite an inspiring example of real Christianity in a Palestinian’s dedicated everyday life, contrasted to the Zio-christian crusader warhawk Pompeo.
We Hold These Truths:
Palestinian Tent of Nations-We Refuse To Be Enemies-Non-Violent Resistance (Video)
Posted by Tom Compton March 22, 2018
Palestinian Christian Daoud Nassar just completed a very successful speaking tour in Arizona.
Daoud’s compelling testimony explains his family’s non-violent actions to save their 100 year old farm that is surrounded by five, illegal, Israeli settlements in the West Bank of Palestine and subject to the injustices of a brutal military occupation.
Daoud’s project is called Tent of Nations, and is truly unique in peacemaking efforts as it follows what Jesus taught, “Blessed are the peacemakers for the shall be called sons of God” (Matthew 5:7).
Please take time to watch this inspiring, 8 minute video by Urban Tribes that gives an excellent overview of what Tent of Nations is all about and explains their principles and objectives that include:
1. We refuse to be victims.
2. We refuse to hate
3. We live with our faith.
4. We believe in justice.
The Tent of Nation’s motto is “We Refuse To Be Enemies.” Daoud’s speaking tour was sponsored by The Friends of Tent of Nations, North America.
Dear Ted Gorsline,
Here’s a very good connect the dots expose
Mint Press News: Was Nicolas Sarkozy’s Role in Taking Out Gaddafi More Personal than Geopolitical?
Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy was arrested Tuesday and indicted last night on charges related to the illegal funding of his successful 2007 campaign for president.
The investigation, which began nearly five years ago, has focused on illegal campaign contributions Sarkozy’s campaign received from Muammar Gaddafi, the former leader of Libya, who was brutally murdered following the UN-backed destruction of his government and country.
The investigation into Sarkozy’s shady connections to Gaddafi has gained steam since late 2016, when French-Lebanese businessman Ziad Takieddine claimed that he had personally delivered suitcases containing €5 million (.2 million) in cash to Sarkozy on Gaddafi’s behalf.
More recently, several former senior figures in Gaddafi’s government provided new evidence to French investigators confirming the illicit campaign contributions.
Overall, Sarkozy’s 2007 presidential campaign is believed to have received €50 million ( million) in funding from Gaddafi. This not only exceeded the legal limit for funding for the entire campaign by €21 million but also violated French laws regarding foreign donations to politicians.
Watch | In a 2011 interview, Gaddafi’s son demands Sarkozy repay Libya money he took for his presidential campaign (on website)
Sarkozy and the manager of his 2007 campaign have denied accepting money from Libya. Sarkozy has also denied accepting illegal funds for his unsuccessful campaign for re-election in 2012, which has also been the subject of scrutiny.
While Sarkozy has long denied these allegations, his arrest over how his past campaign was financed and his relationship with Gaddafi has renewed interest in Sarkozy’s role in the 2011 destruction of the Libyan state as well as fresh speculation regarding Sarkozy’s motives.
Moral high ground or old Mafia trick?
And now Trump has his personal War Cabinet (National Security Council) that Adelson bought and paid for, pretty much filled out with the revolting and utterly insane Bolton on board, needing no Senate confirmation, with only Pompeo’s appointment waiting to be confirmed by Congress.
It’s time to make another trip ‘Back to the Future’, or return to, as the Moody Blues sang, Days of Future Past.
It’s the Neocon Groundhog Day again for the Jewmerican Century.
On the sorrowful 19th anniversary of the commencement of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia opening its military operation against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) during the Kosovo War.
The air strikes lasted from March 24, 1999 to June 10, 1999 for 78 days of living hell for the Serbian Orthodox Christian people.
Russia Insight: HOW IT ALL STARTED: 19 Years Ago NATO War Criminals Bombed Serbia - Russian Documentary
Excerpt from The World Order, Russian documentary on US hegemony with Solovyev, including interviews with Vladimir Putin
19 years ago in the early hours of March 24, 1999, NATO began the bombing the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. “The operation was code-named “Allied Force ” – a cold, uninspired and perfectly descriptive moniker” according to Nebosja Malic.
The causes and consequences of this war have been the object of a vast media disinformation campaign, which has sought to camouflage NATO and US war crimes.
It is important to note that a large segment of the “Progressive Left” in Western Europe and North America were part of this disinformation campaign, presenting NATO military intervention as a necessary humanitarian operation geared towards protecting the rights of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.
The intervention was in violation of international law. President Milosevic at the Rambouillet talks had refused the stationing of NATO troops inside Yugoslavia.
The demonization of Slobodan Milsovic by so-called “Progressives” has served over the years to uphold the legitimacy of the NATO bombings.
It has also provided credibility to “a war crimes tribunal” under the jurisidiction of those who committed extensive war crimes in the name of social justice.
The Just War thesis was also upheld by several prominent intellectuals who viewed the Kosovo war as: “a Just War”.
In turn the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) was upheld by several “Leftists” as a bona fide liberation movement rooted in Marxism.
The KLA –whose leader Hachim Thaci is now president of Kosovo was a paramilitary army supported by Western intelligence, financed and trained by the US and NATO.
It has ties to organised crime. It has links to Al Qaeda, which is also supported by US intelligence.
Global Research: An Imperial Strategy for a New World Order: The Origins of World War III
By Andrew Gavin Marshall (2009)
Currently, the world is witnessing the decline of the American empire, itself a product born out of World War II. As the post-war imperial hegemon, America ran the international monetary system and reigned as champion and arbitrator of the global political economy.
To manage the global political economy, the US has created the single largest and most powerful military force in world history. Constant control over the global economy requires constant military presence and action.
Now that both the American empire and global political economy are in decline and collapse, the prospect of a violent end to the American imperial age is drastically increasing.
This essay is broken into three separate parts. The first part covers US-NATO geopolitical strategy since the end of the Cold War, at the beginning of the New World Order, outlining the western imperial strategy that led to the war in Yugoslavia and the “War on Terror.”
Part 2 analyzes the nature of “soft revolutions” or “colour revolutions” in US imperial strategy, focusing on establishing hegemony over Eastern Europe and Central Asia.
Part 3 analyzes the nature of the imperial strategy to construct a New World Order, focusing on the increasing conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Latin America, Eastern Europe and Africa; and the potential these conflicts have for starting a new world war with China and Russia.
Defining a New Imperial Strategy
In 1991, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, US-NATO foreign policy had to re-imagine its role in the world.
The Cold War served as a means of justifying US imperialist expansion across the globe with the aim of “containing” the Soviet threat.
NATO itself was created and existed for the sole purpose of forging an anti-Soviet alliance. With the USSR gone, NATO had no reason to exist, and the US had to find a new purpose for its imperialist strategy in the world.
In 1992, the US Defense Department, under the leadership of Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney [later to be George Bush Jr.’s VP], had the Pentagon’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Paul Wolfowitz [later to be George Bush Jr.’s Deputy Secretary of Defense and President of the World Bank], write up a defense document to guide American foreign policy in the post-Cold War era, commonly referred to as the “New World Order.”
The Defense Planning Guidance document was leaked in 1992, and revealed that, “In a broad new policy statement that is in its final drafting phase, the Defense Department asserts that America’s political and military mission in the post-cold-war era will be to ensure that no rival superpower is allowed to emerge in Western Europe, Asia or the territories of the former Soviet Union…”
And, furthermore, that, “The classified document makes the case for a world dominated by one superpower whose position can be perpetuated by constructive behavior and sufficient military might to deter any nation or group of nations from challenging American primacy.”
Further, “the new draft sketches a world in which there is one dominant military power whose leaders ‘must maintain the mechanisms for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role’.”
Among the necessary challenges to American supremacy, the document “postulated regional wars against Iraq and North Korea,” and identified China and Russia as its major threats. It further “suggests that the United States could also consider extending to Eastern and Central European nations security commitments similar to those extended to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Arab states along the Persian Gulf.”
The wars in Yugoslavia throughout the 1990s served as a justification for the continued existence of NATO in the world, and to expand American imperial interests in Eastern Europe.
The World Bank and IMF set the stage for the destabilization of Yugoslavia. After long-time dictator of Yugoslavia, Josip Tito, died in 1980, a leadership crisis developed.
In 1982, American foreign policy officials organized a set of IMF and World Bank loans, under the newly created Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs), to handle the crisis of the billion US debt. The effect of the loans, under the SAP, was that they “wreaked economic and political havoc… The economic crisis threatened political stability … it also threatened to aggravate simmering ethnic tensions.”
In 1989, Slobodan Milosevic became President of Serbia, the largest and most powerful of all the Yugoslav republics. Also in 1989, Yugoslavia’s Premier traveled to the US to meet President George H.W. Bush in order to negotiate another financial aid package. In 1990, the World Bank/IMF program began, and the Yugoslav state’s expenditures went towards debt repayment.
As a result, social programs were dismantled, the currency devalued, wages frozen, and prices rose. The “reforms fueled secessionist tendencies that fed on economic factors as well as ethnic divisions, virtually ensuring the de facto secession of the republic,” leading to Croatia and Slovenia’s succession in 1991.
In 1990, US the intelligence community released a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), predicting that Yugoslavia would break apart, erupt in civil war, and the report then placed blame on Serbian President Milosevic for the coming destabilization.
In 1991, conflict broke out between Yugoslavia and Croatia, when it, too, declared independence. A ceasefire was reached in 1992. Yet, the Croats continued small military offensives until 1995, as well as participating in the war in Bosnia. In 1995, Operation Storm was undertaken by Croatia to try to retake the Krajina region.
A Croatian general was recently put on trial at The Hague for war crimes during this battle, which was key to driving the Serbs out of Croatia and “cemented Croatian independence.” The US supported the operation and the CIA actively provided intelligence to Croat forces, leading to the displacement of between 150,000 and 200,000 Serbs, largely through means of murder, plundering, burning villages and ethnic cleansing.
The Croatian Army was trained by US advisers, and the general on trial was even personally supported by the CIA.
The Clinton administration gave the “green light” to Iran to arm the Bosnian Muslims and “from 1992 to January 1996, there was an influx of Iranian weapons and advisers into Bosnia.”
Further, “Iran, and other Muslim states, helped to bring Mujihadeen fighters into Bosnia to fight with the Muslims against the Serbs, ‘holy warriors’ from Afghanistan, Chechnya, Yemen and Algeria, some of whom had suspected links with Osama bin Laden’s training camps in Afghanistan.”
Continued, 3 part series.
RT: 15 years on: Looking back at NATO’s ‘humanitarian’ bombing of Yugoslavia (2014)
Chanted on the Field of Blackbirds:
For the honorable Cross and golden freedom!” — Holy Great-Martyr Tsar Lazar
“Give up everything for Christ, but Christ for nothing!” — St. Sava of Serbia
From book description published by St Herman of Alaska Brotherhood: “Great-Martyr Tsar Lazar was one of the greatest men in the history of the Serbian nation and the entire world.
He ruled the Kingdom of Serbia, which was united by him, at a most pivotal moment in history. At a time when the Moslem horde was threatening to overrun all of Europe, this truly valiant leader, having been inspired by an angelic vision, sacrificed himself and his army at the fateful battle of Kosovo on June 15, 1389.
Choosing the heavenly kingdom over the earthly one, he and his army went to victorious martyrdom.
When receiving the Eucharist at the Divine Liturgy prior to battle, they all chanted in unison, “For the honorable Cross and golden freedom!”, followed by the famous words of St. Sava of Serbia, “Give up everything for Christ, but Christ for nothing!”
As a result of the battle that Tsar Lazar waged on Kosovo Field, the Moslems never regained strength to take Western Europe. Thus, the Orthodox Kingdom of Serbia must always be acknowledged by Western Europe as that “sacrificial” kingdom which stood in the path of total Moslem captivity.
The Holy Great-Martyr Lazar was a sterling example of an Orthodox Christian monarch, both through his own pious life and trust in the Lord, and through his many acts of charity.
During his reign he built and restored a great many churches and monasteries in his own country and abroad, including on Mount Athos. His holy and incorrupt relics lie to this day in Ravanica, a monastery that he himself founded.
LobeLog: Trump’s New War Cabinet
by Shahed Ghoreishi
On Thursday, President Trump moved one step closer to completing his preferred cabinet.
General H.R. McMaster, whom Trump called boring, was replaced as national security advisor by ultra-hawk John Bolton.
This is the same John Bolton who wrote the forward for Pamela Geller’s hate-filled book about President Obama, called on Israel to nuke Iran, urged the United States to bomb Iran and North Korea, abused a female USAID employee, advocated on behalf of the NRA for more gun rights for Russian citizens, and still defends the Iraq war. I could go on.
Trump’s other appointments have similar attributes.
Mike Pompeo, set to take over in Foggy Bottom, compared Iran to the Islamic State and called it a “thuggish police state” that is “intent [on] destroying America.”
Lastly, Gina Haspel, set to take over the CIA, has a history of torturing detainees under the Bush administration. She even destroyed the recordings taken of the torture years later.
Meanwhile, John Kelley remains in a precarious position as chief of staff.
This team constitutes a gang of evil. The anti-diplomacy, pro-torture, pro-war initiatives they have supported have cost lives and created instability in the Middle East to the detriment of U.S. national security and international standing.
Additionally, Bolton and Pompeo have ties to hate groups that promote division at home (no wonder Trump likes them).
Also, some of the initial appointments belong to the same gang, including UN Ambassador Nikki Haley and Michael D’Andrea, the head of the CIA’s Iran operations.
Three upcoming dates likely encouraged Trump to make these rapid changes.
North Korea and Iran
Trump is slated to meet directly with Kim Jong Un by this coming May. The changes in Trump’s cabinet have put a damper on the preparations as the deadline approaches.
However, the changes are no accident. Trump has used bellicose language towards North Korea from early on in his presidency. By having a like-minded secretary of state and national security advisor in place, he is sending a deliberate signal to Kim Jong Un.
If Trump is going to play lead diplomat, he still has threatening cabinet members in place as a counterforce. But with such a high-level start to the talks, as many analysts have repeated, there’s little room for diplomatic recourse should the Trump-Kim discussions fail.
Bolton would be the ideal person to game the next move in such a situation and show an aggressive posture.
That some in the president’s own party don’t seem to care about the consequences of war or even the consequences of a limited strike does not bode well should the talks fail (or fail to happen).
The Iran nuclear deal is another worrying case.
On May 12, Trump must decide whether the deal should be recertified. The International Atomic Energy Agency, assigned to overlook the implementation of the deal, has said that Iran has complied to the benefit of the international community.
Meanwhile, the Europeans and the Iranians have grown frustrated regarding Washington’s threats to tear up the deal.
The Europeans have proposed adding an addendum regarding Iran’s ballistic missiles, but the Iranians are not having it.
Iran remains irritated by the lack of investment from foreign businesses and banks, which they blame on Trump’s bellicose language.
The recent hiring of Bolton sends a major signal to Iran’s leadership that the United States is doubling down on its aggressive posture.
Again, this is by design. Trump wants either to provoke Iran to withdraw from the deal first—thus shifting blame away from Washington—or to add sanctions in May in direct violation of the deal and thereby killing it.
Either way, Bolton’s presence increases the chance of a conflict that already has concerned U.S. allies.
Several regional enemies of Iran would support an American intervention.
The overlap of the Bolton announcement with the visit to Washington of hawkish Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, responsible for the deadly Yemen intervention, is likely no coincidence.
The Blue Wave
Everything points toward November. The president and the Republican Party know that they are likely to suffer a “blue wave” on election night.
This is the third date likely inspiring Trump’s recent moves. The president is a showman at heart. He is more timing and appearance than substance.
Trump is likely to ratchet up tensions with Iran and North Korea in reaction to, or in prevention of, a blue wave.
Of course, Trump would need the unlikely approval of Congress for any major intervention, but the intervention does not have to be on a regular armed conflict.
It could also be in the cyber realm. Or it could be clandestine, which requires less congressional oversight.
During the campaign, Trump loved to say that he was against the Iraq war, which he called a “disaster.”
Apparently during negotiations with Bolton, Trump had him promise that he “wouldn’t start any wars.”
However, this is the same Trump who has continued America’s war for the Greater Middle East despite lamenting the “trillions of dollars spent and thousands of lives lost” in the region.
The president has many attributes, but consistency is not one of them. Putting Pompeo and Bolton in such major positions of power suggests that Trump and his gang of evil are preparing for the very conflicts that he promised to avoid.
Shahed Ghoreishi is a graduate of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.
US Foreign Policy: Banditry as “Business as Usual”
By Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović
Global Research, March 04, 2018
“If the Nuremberg Laws were applied, then every post-war American President would have been hanged” – Noam Chomsky
Henry Kissinger, one of the fundamental figures in creating and maintaining the US policy of global hegemony during the Cold War, was quite clear and precise in his overviewing the issue of the American geopolitical position, national goals, and foreign policy.
[Brzezinksi, a Cold War ideologue who pushed the CIA covert war against the USSR in Afghanistan, armed Bin Ladin, his Wahabi Arab “Afghans” jihadists, and the Afghanis themselves, straddling the end days of the Soviet Union and the early first decade of of the weakened, tumultuous, economically raped, Russian Federation, saw the opportunity to actually realize the unipolar hegemony called for in Luce’s American Century before the US ever entered WWII.
Brzezinksi aggressively pushed Kissinger’s foreign policy points forward in his Grand Chessboard Strategy of the 1990s which explicitly laid out the goal of capturing the Russian heartland.
Thus the Chechen Wars, and the rest of the times of troubles in the terrorist infested Caucasus, and elsewhere on the Russian Federation’s periphery during the 1990s and into the first decade of the 2000s, and which Russia is still dealing with.
The 1990s also saw the rise of the mostly Jewish Neocon Crazies of Project for a New American Century, pushing the advance the New World Order, and carving out vast chunks of the Middle East for Hell Aviv’s regional aspirations of Greater IsraHell]
[Kissinger’s] remarks can be summarized in the following points:
1. The US is an island off the shores of the large landmass of Eurasia.
2. The resources and population of Eurasia far exceed the resources and population of the US.
3. Any domination by any single state from Eurasia (either from the European or the Asian part) is a critical danger for the American geopolitical and geoeconomic aims as well as national interest regardless during or after the time of the Cold War.
4. A mortal danger for the US is a formation of any political-military coalitions between the Eurasian great powers (primarily between the USSR/Russia and China) as such coalition would have a real capacity to outstrip both the US economy and military.
5. The US strategic global geopolitical interest is to thwart creation of such Eurasian coalition (the USSR/Russia-China).
In fact, H. Kissinger recognized two fundamental facts in dealing with global geopolitics:
1) Eurasia is of the crucial global geopolitical importance; and
2) Russia is the Heartland of Eurasia.
Therefore, to have a control over Russia means to have a control over Eurasia and to control Eurasia means to control the rest of the world.
For that reason, the US struggle against the communist USSR during the Cold War or Putin’s Russia today is nothing else than a formal pretext for a realization of the basic US geopolitical task from the global perspective: to have a control over the Heartland of Eurasia.
Subsequently, any kind of independent and/or stronger Russia is not an acceptable solution for the American policymakers.
The Nature of the US
In order to properly understand the post-Cold War global hegemony foreign policy by the US Administration, it is necessary to realize the very nature of the US as a state.
Basically, the US foreign policy of global hegemony is shaped by two most important internal processes which exist from the very beginning of the US independence and statehood (declared in 1776):
1. A mass consumerist mentality of her citizens that is deeply permeated throughout American (sub)culture;
2. A corresponding policy of maintaining world’s military supremacy for the sake to ensure privileged possession of the global goods, energy, natural resources, and credit.
For example, there are 800 US military bases across the globe and one of the biggest of them is located in Kosovo (Bondsteel) – one of the richest regions in Europe according to its reserves of the natural resources (at least 500 billion $US).
US army in Afganistan
The American strategy of global hegemony after the WWII was not only to compete against the Soviet military power and political influence but it was and is much more important to establish such world that is going mandatory to be hospitable for the growth of the US economy.
Therefore, the American military-political global dominance was ideologically justified by anti-communism and the US alleged leading role in defending the “free world”.
However, after the end of the European communism, dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and dismemberment of the USSR, Washington simply justified a continuation of its Cold War policy of global hegemony by defending Europe (and probably the rest of the world) from the “Russian aggression”.
A “free world” was identified with a full acceptance of the American values, norms, political and economic systems and (sub)culture.
According to such geopolitical project, all of those governments who rejected to “dance according to the American playing” became proclaimed as the enemies of “free world” threatened to be bombed and occupied (like the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999).
Nevertheless, the fundamental allegory of the American promotion of independence and democracy (the basic components of “free world”) is that this country is not either really independent (being the West Bank of Israel from 1948 onward) nor fully democratic (not being even among the first 30 democratic states in the world).
[We are all Palestinians and Serbs now, if not captive bodily, then captured by the anti-Christ spirit under the Zionist militarized occupation government of the Jews and Judaizers in the ‘West Bank’ of our minds and souls. - Kj]
A numerous US military interventions after 1945, as an instrument for the realization of the geopolitical project of global hegemony, however, very much undermined the very meaning of democracy and leading at the same time to large-scale human rights abuses.
The concept of Pax Americana is having as its crucial strategy to maintain cheap supplies of raw materials and especially of the cheap supply of oil as the crucial energetic source for the US consumerism economy.
Therefore, immediately after the WWII the basic US strategy became to establish the American hegemony in the oil-rich countries in the region of the Middle East supporting there all kinds of non-democratic and even dictatorial regimes who expressed political loyalty to Washington as the regimes of Iran (Persia) from the CIA/M16-sponsored coup in 1953 up to the Islamic Revolution in 1978−1979, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and above all of Saudi Arabia.
The Middle East and the “Resource War”
The beginning of this process of making the regional client states started in 1945 when the US President Franklin D. Roosevelt established a strategic partnership with Abdul-Aziz ibn Saud who was a founder of the modern Saudi royal family and ruling dynasty.
The deal was that the US will protect the dynasty, which is from the beginning supporting the fundamentalist Wahhabi brand of the Sunni Islam, from all inner and outer enemies for the exchange of the US privileged access to the Saudi oil.
Iran was the second country of importance for the US regional “oil policy” where the fundamental American influence was established in 1953 when the CIA-M16 backed coup against democratically elected PM Mohammad Mossadegh brought to power, in fact, the Western oil companies.
Therefore, it is not of any surprise that the Iranian Revolution was ideologically and politically an amalgamation of the Islamic Shiite theocracy and very strong anti-Americanism.
The US hegemonic design to prevent any hostility actor to gain any foothold in geostrategically and energetically extremely important region of the Middle East was clearly formulated in the 1980 “Carter Doctrine”.
One of the fundamental reasons for formulating such doctrine was, of course, protection of the existence of the Zionist Israel and its policy of ethnic cleansing of the domestic Palestinians.
Therefore, the US policy to project military power into the region of the Middle East became increased substantially followed by the abnormal militarization of Israel.
In the years of R. Reagan’s Administration, the US transformed Afghani Taliban’s into its sponsored movement and created long-time partnership with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan for the maintaining Islamist mujahedeen Taliban military capabilities against the Soviet army in Afghanistan.
[But at] the same time…opening possibilities for the emergence of different anti-Western jihadist military groups like al-Qaeda of Saudi Osama bin Laden who will turn back their arms against their sponsors once the Soviet army left Afghanistan.
Therefore, the regional militant anti-Western Islamism in different forms that emerged after the Cold War did not arise suddenly out of the framework of the US imperialistic and hegemonic geopolitical ambitions in the Middle East.
A new phase of the US policy in the Middle East came into force in 1990−1991 with the First Gulf War that was fought from the US point of view (like the Second Gulf War in 2003 that resulted in the military occupation of Iraq) for the geopolitical maintenance of the ideology of economic security that was just wrapped into the propaganda of the 2001 G. W. Bush’s doctrine of the “War on Terror”.
And then conveniently came the World Trade Center Terrorist Disaster on September 11, 2001, which was immediately blamed on Bin Ladin, almost certainly in end-stage renal failure living with his Taliban hosts at the time, and to whom he’d forsworn undertaking any international Al Qaeda actions from Afghan soil, and he publicly denied it right at the time of the attack.
It was the sought and prayed for “New Pearl Harbor” that the Bush NeoCrusaders™ and crazy mostly Jewish PNACers earnestly craved in order to launch the next phase of the New Jewmerican Century under the benevolent gaze of the two eyes US of IsraHell (DC-Tel Aviv), and Bin Ladin became the face of the ultimate Evil Doer™.
Curiously, for lack of any evidence and formal charge connecting him to it, for over ten years the FBI never listed the 9/11 attacks on Osama bin Ladin’s Poster on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted, which noted his role as the suspected mastermind of the deadly U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa on Aug. 7, 1998 and “other terrorist attacks elsewhere”.
FDD Long War Journal (ultra Neocon):
Houthi leader again promises to take part in any future conflict between Hezbollah and Israel
BY (((CALEB WEISS))) | March 23rd, 2018
Abdel Malek al Houthi, the leader of Yemen’s Houthi insurgent group.
In a recent interview with the Lebanese publication Al Akhbar, Abdel Malek al Houthi, the leader of Yemen’s Iranian-backed Houthi insurgent group, again promised his forces would fight alongside Hezbollah in a future conflict with Israel in Lebanon.
“If there is a new war with Israel, we will not hesitate to send the fighters,” al Houthi says.
He follows this statement up by saying that there are “thousands of fighters from the sons of the tribes excited to fight against Israel.” These comments were directed to Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Lebanese Hezbollah.
Additionally, referring to the Houthi’s relationship to both Hezbollah and Iran, the Houthi leader said that “we consider this the responsible, correct, and natural position according to our Islamic affiliation and because of high interest to our nation.”
He then states “we see in our brothers in the Islamic Republic and Hezbollah brothers [who] won the honor of liberation and [who] carried the flag of the Ummah in the face of American hegemony and have taken a sincere stand with the Palestinian people.”
This is not the first time al Houthi has made this promise. Last summer, he said “The Yemeni nation is ready to take part in any future confrontation against the Israeli enemy.”
He continued by saying that Israel should “take us into consideration in all future conflicts with Hezbollah and the Palestinian people.”
Houthi also addressed Hassan Nasrallah in this statement, which was later republished on Hezbollah’s Al Manar website.
“Your bet on the Yemenis is proper. Israel must beware the Yemeni participation in any of its military confrontations with Hezbollah or the Palestinian resistance,” Houthi said to Nasrallah.
Houthi’s speech came one month after Nasrallah mentioned that in any future war with Israel, the Jewish state would be met with resistance by fighters from “Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.”
Caleb Weiss is an intern at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a contributor to The Long War Journal.
No way the Jews could come close to the Yemenis’ degree of physical, mental and spiritual toughness, guerrilla skills and experience picking off mechanized units, especially in the inhospitable hills and rugged mountains.
Thin and wiry, acrobatic, the highland Yemenis move like invisible smoke, and practically become one with the rocks, gullies and sand that they’ve live in all their lives.
Most of the tribesmen fight barefoot or in sandals, are excellent scouts and trackers like the Bedouin, and easily move around at night without hi tech equipment. Superb snipers even with old, unsophisticated rifles with primitive gun sites. The highland traditional Yemeni tribes raise their sons to warrior traditions from the time they start walking.
And the other resistance fighters Nasrallah mentions are extremely battle hardened, disciplined, and very well trained and formidable, entirely comfortable with teaming up with each other after 7 years in the Syria-Iraq battlespace. Hezbollah and the other paramilitary militias are now accomplished and flexible in both conventional and irregular warfare, capable of participating in joint operations and small guerrilla bands.
The Houthis and their allied loyalist regular Yemeni military groups have also been working and fighting together for the past three years against the US-backed Saudis and their Gulf partners.
Apart from inter-tribal and clan hostilities, Yemeni tribesmen are traditional patriarchal tribal people, humble, pious, and similar to other Arab groups, while generally shy, usually genial, hospitable, and ready to extend the hand of friendship, but also zealous and proud of being Yemeni Arabs with a living ancient culture and history.
Living under harsh, remote rural conditions in the various wadis of the high desert, and on always on the edge of poverty, the highland tribes have a high infant mortality rate of around 20%, and so children are very precious, and every tribe considers each child a blessing from God.
The group’s flag reads as following: “The God Is Great, Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse on the Jews, Victory to Islam”.
This motto is partially modeled on the motto of revolutionary Iran, which reads “Death to U.S. and death to Israel”.
Both the Yemenis and the Iranians have always made it clear that they don’t wish death to the American Jewish people, that the slogan is simply against the interference of the US and Israeli governments.
They also call Saudi Arabia a U.S. puppet state, which it is.
In the Arabic Houthi-affiliated TV and radio stations they use culturally relevant, national spirit rallying, religious connotations associated with jihad against Israel and the US, and Saudi Arabia, in ways typical of Northern Yemenis.
The MSM attempts to present Yemeni sense of defensive holy war in the same international terrorist light as Al Qaeda or ISIS. The Houthis have never declared war on America, they never attempted to sink the USS Liberty, they just want the US to leave them alone after over a decade of US covert warfare, drone attacks, botched special forces raids, and the main sponsor of Saudi Arabia’s disasterous war on the Yemeni.
Foreign Policy Mag: Steve Walt: Welcome to the Dick Cheney Administration
The problem with John Bolton isn’t that he’s an extremist. It’s that he’s mainstream.
The other shoe dropped. On the heels of his cowardly fire-by-tweet dismissal of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Donald Trump has dismissed National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster and replaced him with John Bolton, the hard-line former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
Uber-hawk Mike Pompeo is headed from the CIA to the State Department, and Gina Haspel, a CIA loyalist who ran a torture site for George W. Bush and authorized the destruction of videotapes documenting what the CIA was doing, has been picked to replace him.
Just how scared should you be?
There seem to be two general reactions to the latest upheaval in Trump’s topsy-turvy.
One interpretation is that this latest reshuffle amounts to Trump getting rid of the “grown-ups” who have been trying to manage the tweeter-in-chief for the past year and replacing them with advisers who see the world as he does and will let “Trump be Trump.”
In this view, the new team will enable him instead of trying to rein him in, and he’ll become the Trump of 2016, who called U.S. foreign policy a “complete and total disaster” and promised “America First.”
Trump himself has encouraged this view by suggesting that he is finally assembling the sort of team he has always wanted. (Which raises an obvious question: Who was the idiot who picked his first team? Or his second? Oh, right.)
The second interpretation is more alarmist and basically tells you to start digging that backyard bomb shelter.
In this view, the departures of Tillerson and McMaster and the arrivals of Bolton, Pompeo, and Haspel herald the ascendance of a hawkish contingent that will tear up the Iran deal, reinstate the torture regime, and eventually start a war with North Korea that goes way beyond a simple “bloody nose.”
And with Bolton in the White House, Trump is going to be advised by a guy who never saw a war he didn’t like (when observed from a safe distance, of course).
Let me be clear: Bolton’s appointment is on par with most of Trump’s personnel choices, which is to say that it’s likely to be a disaster. His views on foreign policy are crude and bellicose, and his track record as a policy advocate and pundit do not, to put it politely, inspire confidence.
Nor does he seem to have learned a thing from his past mistakes.
And where McMaster and Tillerson did what they could to limit the damage that Trump has done to America’s international reputation and critical alliance partnerships, Bolton’s particular skill as a diplomat seems to have been finding creative new ways to offend America’s friends.
But Bolton’s arrival is hardly a return to the Trump that we saw in the 2016 campaign.
Trump ran for president by attacking the entire foreign-policy establishment, suggesting that it was out of touch, unaccountable, and prone to get the United States into pointless wars.
Since becoming president, however, Trump has increased defense spending, escalated in Afghanistan, given the Pentagon and certain headstrong U.S. allies the green light to use more force in more places (with disappointing results), and generally doubled down on the same overly militarized approach to foreign policy that had repeatedly failed under Bill Clinton, Bush, and, yes, even Barack Obama.
Bolton’s appointment (along with Trump’s other personnel shifts) is not a bold move toward “America First” — if that term means a smarter and more restrained foreign policy that would reduce U.S. overseas burdens, improve the country’s strategic position, and actually make Americans safer and richer.
Instead, whether Trump knows it or not, putting Bolton, Pompeo, and Haspel in key positions looks more like a return to “Cheneyism,” by which I mean a foreign policy that inflates threats, dismisses serious diplomacy, thinks allies are mostly a burden, is contemptuous of institutions, believes that the United States is so powerful that it can just issue ultimatums and expect others to cave, and believes that a lot of thorny foreign-policy problems can be solved by just blowing something up.
Boy, that formula really worked well the last time the United States tried it, didn’t it? No wonder a sophisticated foreign-policy expert like Trump wants to try it again.
Thus, the real lesson of the Bolton appointment has less to do with Bolton himself and more about what it says about the U.S. foreign-policy establishment.
You’re undoubtedly going to read a lot of heartfelt, knickers-in-a-twist commentaries in the next few weeks about the dangers of appointing a wild-eyed radical to such a sensitive position, but the plain fact is that Bolton is not really an outlier within the U.S. foreign-policy community.
It’s not like Trump just appointed Medea Benjamin (from the left) or Rand Paul (from the right) or even an experienced and knowledgeable contrarian such as Charles W. Freeman Jr. or Andrew Bacevich.
Instead, he appointed someone with decidedly hawkish views but who is still within the “acceptable” consensus in Washington.
Look at Bolton’s pedigree and career. He’s a graduate of Yale University and Yale Law School. He worked at Covington & Burling, a venerable D.C. law firm where former Secretary of State Dean Acheson also worked.
He has been a senior fellow for years at the conservative but mainstream American Enterprise Institute.
He writes frequently for obscure, wild-and-crazy, “radical” publications including, er … the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and even Foreign Policy.
Is this your idea of a “fringe” figure?
True, Bolton was a vocal supporter of the Iraq War, but that hardly makes him a weirdo.
As I’m sure he’d be the first to point out, a lot of other people drank that particular Kool-Aid, including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, James Steinberg, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Susan Rice, Robert Gates, and a long, long list of other “respectable” figures.
And don’t forget that the other geniuses who dreamed up and sold that disaster — people such as William Kristol, James Woolsey, Robert Kagan, Bret Stephens, Max Boot, Eliot Cohen, David Frum, Paul Wolfowitz, etc. — are still respected figures in the foreign-policy establishment despite having never admitted they were wrong or expressed any public regret for launching a disastrous war in which hundreds of thousands of people died.
Like Trump, Bolton seems particularly worried about Iran and North Korea, but so are most members of Congress and much of the think tank world in D.C., too.
Indeed, there are plenty of people who strongly support the current nuclear deal but who also believe the United States should get tougher with Tehran.
Nor is Bolton the only person in Washington who has proposed taking military action against North Korea.
After all, it was Bolton’s predecessor, the now-departing McMaster, who kept making the case for the “bloody nose” approach.
South Front: VICTORIES AND DIPLOMACY OF TURKEY. WHAT TO EXPECT NEXT
South Front: In recent days, Turkey achieved the most notable military victory since the Greco-Turkish War of 1919-1922.
On March 18, the Turkish Armed Forces (TAF) and the Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army (FSA) captured the city of Afrin from the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) following an almost two-month long military operation in northwestern Syria.
The advance, entitled Operation Olive Branch, was widely covered in the Turkish media in a heroic style creating a patriotic frenzy in the country. During the whole of 2017, the media and authorities were conducting a large-scale propaganda campaign supporting the military and encouraging citizens to enlist.
Some foreigners visiting Turkey in the period mentioned leaflets in municipal transport vehicles promoting the ideal of becoming a martyr defending the interests of the country and nation.
Turkish policy is infamous for its flexibility, a rapid and often hard-to-predict ability to change priorities and allies. According to some reports, the Turkish military victory in Afrin had become possible thanks to a political agreement between the Turkish leadership and the administration of US President Donald Trump.
In recent months, there was always at least one Turkish deputy foreign minister in the US for negotiations and at one point most of them were there together. Meanwhile, Ankara was involved in a successful political dialogue with Moscow, thus preventing Russian interference with its plans or support for Syrian Kurds. Nonetheless, the US-Turkish backroom deal was the main factor behind the success in Afrin.
The US halted its military support to Kurdish militias in northwestern Syria and pressured the Kurdish leadership in the rest of so-called Rojava thus preventing a minor chance that the YPG, known in the mainstream media as the SDF, would open up a new front against the Turkish forces.
As a result, the YPG abandoned its key stronghold of Afrin almost without firing a single shot.
The number and types of weapons and ammunition captured by the TAF and the FSA in the city proves that the YPG in Afrin had been receiving military supplies from both the so-called US-led and Russian-led blocks. While details of the game behind the scenes are yet to be revealed, the recent developments have, in any case, led to the Turkish military and diplomatic success.
Almost immediately, following the fall of Afrin, Turkey started implementing a more pro-US approach in its foreign policy. It wiped the YPG out of northwestern Syria and thus no longer needs to manoeuvre between the US and Russia over this issue.
At the same time, Ankara’s expansionist aspirations are still on the table. The Erdogan regime will try to annex the north and northwest of Syria by establishing a quasi-state or an autonomy controlled by its proxies.
The Syrian government, Iran and Russia will not be able to tolerate this. In this way, the US could become an organic ally of Turkey in northern Syria in the near future. However, the depth of the possible US-Turkish cooperation will depend on multiple factors, one of them is the Manbij issue. The city is currently controlled by the SDF, which is a mostly PR brand for YPG units backed up by the US.
Ankara seeks to kick the YPG out of the city and its countryside by a military force. However, US troops deployed in Manbij and patrolling the Syrian-Turkish border in the SDF-held areas prevent this. In this situation, Turkey has proposed to the US to establish a joint security zone in the area, which will not allow the YPG presence. However, the idea has not received a public support from Washington so far.
“That’s funny, because no agreement has been reached,” US Department of State spokesperson Heather Nauert told reporters on March 20 commenting on the statement by the Turkish presidential spokesman that the sides have already reached an agreement over the city.
The changes in the Turkish stance towards Russia can be clearly observed through its foreign policy rhetoric. On March 16, the country’s foreign ministry issued an official statement describing the 2014 referendum in Crimea illegitimate.
On the other hand, Ankara seeks to maintain at least neutral relations with Moscow and to develop further the economic cooperation with it. The TurkStream pipeline is a strategically important project for the Turkish leadership because it will allow it to gain control over the transit of natural gas into southern Europe.
In the coming months, Turkey will continue strengthening its political and military influence in the region as well as developing its foreign policy activity.
If Ankara succeed in this, the other regional powers will face additional risks caused by the traditional pan-Turkish expansionism, which arises every time Turkey strengthens its military and political power.
Meantime, Turkey has the following goals:
1) to consolidate gains and to expand the territory under its control in northern and northwestern Syria as well as in northern Iraq. The expansion in northern Iraq may be conducted under the pretext of military efforts against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in Sinjar.
The military presence in neighboring countries will be justified publicly by the need to create so-called “security zones” to combat “terrorism”;
2) to strengthen positions on the so-called Cyprus Issue. Northern Cyprus is a self-proclaimed state occupying the northern part of the island and is recognized only by Turkey. Turkey maintains a notable military force there;
3) to strengthen its influence in the Aegean Sea;
4) to expand its cultural and political influence into the Turkic states of Central Asia and to restore its clandestine influence on the Turkic regions of Russia.
Anti-war.com: Illegal Wars:
The New American Way
by Maj. Danny Sjursen Posted on March 24, 2018
[T]he President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons. …
– S.J. Res. 23 (107th): Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), Sept. 18, 2001
The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary … in order to … defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq. …
– H. J. Res 114 (107th): Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq, Oct. 18, 2002
It’s all so obvious to a detached observer. Nonetheless, it remains unspoken. The United States of America is waging several wars with dubious legal sanction in domestic or international law.
The U.S. military stands astride the Greater Mideast region on behalf of an increasingly rogue-like regime in Washington, D.C.
Worse still, this isn’t a Donald Trump problem, per se. No, three successive administrations – Democratic and Republican – have widened the scope of a global “war” on a tactic (terror), on the basis of two at best vague, and at worst extralegal, congressional authorizations for the use of force (AUMF).
Indeed, the US is veritably addicted to waging undeclared, unwinnable wars with unconvincing legal sanction.
Despite 17 years of fighting, dying and killing, there have been no specific declarations of war.
Instead, one president after another, and hundreds of derelict-in-their-duty congress members, have simply decided on their own that a vague resolution, rubber-stamped while the rubble in New York was still smoking, authorizes each and every conflict in which America’s soldiers – and many more civilians – continue to die.
This AUMF authorized the president to kill or capture those who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, but, well, few of America’s current adversaries had anything to do with that.
If that doesn’t seem sufficient, Washington points to the only other congressional framework for perpetual war, the long-ago discredited war resolution, which sanctioned George W. Bush’s deceitful conquest of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.
But Saddam is dead and his regime gone, replaced by a U.S.-imposed chauvinist Shiite government which is now (tenuously) sovereign in Baghdad.
The specific circumstances surrounding that war resolution have passed.
So, you ask, how can, for example, war in Yemen or Somalia, be justified on the resolution’s account? Because the policy elites don’t care about logic or rational deduction, that’s why. It’s a convenient ruse, and they assume we’re not paying attention.
And the rest of us, well, we stay mostly silent, wrapped up with trying to earn a living in America’s new Gilded Age, its vastly unequal economy, and remain distracted by fancy handheld computer technology.
They, the ones who act in our name – liberal and conservative policymakers alike – count on your apathy. They don’t want you to scratch off the veneer of legality and question the basis of each individual forever war in the Mideast. That would be inconvenient, but it is exactly what true citizens must do.
Let’s take a quick regional tour of some of America’s various shooting wars, and critically examine their legal sanction as it relates to the two existing AUMFs.
• How about we begin with the next massive quagmire awaiting the US military in the Mideast: Syria.
Almost no one realizes that the US is now the proud owner of approximately one-third of Syria. Sure, we rent it out to various allied, mostly Kurdish militias, but it’s US air power and a few thousand ground troops which make that possible. America got into Syria, ostensibly, to combat Islamic State – a truly brutal group.
Still, strictly speaking, there was no Islamic State in 2001, and there weren’t any Syrians among the 9/11 hijackers.
Now, one might argue that Islamic State is a spinoff of al-Qaeda, which did attack the United States. Careful though – by 2014, Islamic State had split from the local al-Qaeda franchise (the Nusra Front), and the two had become warring rivals.
More confusing still, while one could argue the 2001 AUMF covers al-Nusra, the US has rarely attacked it and, indeed, sometimes armed and supplied Islamist elements affiliated with the group. What a twisted legal web Washington has spun.
Still, there the US military now stands, responsible for the hopes, dreams, sustenance and well-being of millions of Syrians. Its troops aren’t going anywhere anytime soon, either. Before Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was canned, he announced that US “troops will remain in Syria” – essentially indefinitely – “to ensure that neither Iran nor President Bashar al-Assad of Syria will take over [these] areas.”
That’s strange. Assad is a brutal monster, sure, but he remains the sovereign ruler of Syria, and, well, technically he didn’t invite the US military into his country. That means, in a certain sense, that only Russia and Iran – purported American adversaries – have any legal sanction in Syria.
So, to review, the US military occupies the east of Syria, facing down and one mistake away from a war with Assad, Iran, Russia and Turkey. That sounds risky. Oh, and one more question, do the 2001 or 2002 AUMFs cover the US killing of scores of Russian mercenaries? Because that happened, too, just last month.
• The world’s worst humanitarian disaster zone today is in the Arab world’s poorest country: Yemen. Here, U.S.-backed Saudi planes drop American bombs on Yemeni Houthi rebels from planes fueled in midair by the US Air Force.
Though the official count of civilian deaths seemed to stop at 10,000 in 2016, journalist and Yemen specialist Iona Craig, of The Intercept, told me this week on my podcast that the real number probably approaches 50,000.
That’s just the direct, war-related deaths. The bombing and Saudi – and arguably US Navy – blockade also has kicked off a record-breaking cholera epidemic and a worsening famine. Children literally starve to death in Yemen. The Houthis, a Shiite sect from northwest Yemen, had nothing to do with 9/11 and hardly collaborated with Saddam’s Iraq.
How, then, can we square US complicity in Saudi terror-bombing with international or domestic law? Short answer: We can’t.
• In Somalia, where the US military has maintained an on-again, off-again presence since 1993, the Air Force bombs and Navy SEAL commandos raid the native al-Shabab militants. A particularly nasty bunch ensconced in a nastier neighborhood, al-Shabab didn’t even exist in its current form in 2001, and certainly had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.
With no known relationship to Saddam Hussein, it’s hard to see how these Islamist militiamen fall under either AUMF.
• Niger hit the headlines in a big way last year when four Army Green Berets died in a vicious ambush. No one, it seemed, not even superhawk Sen. Lindsay Graham, knew we had any troops there. Apparently, that’s no longer a requirement for the places America sends its soldiers to kill and die. Heck, most Americans had to look up the country’s pronunciation and scramble to find the joint on a map.
Here, as in most foreign interventions in the African Sahel, the US (and France) are being sucked into essentially local tribal, resource or ethnic conflicts that masquerade as transnational Islamism. These desert fighters had nothing to do with 9/11, the local Islamic State affiliate didn’t exist in 2001, and Niger is 3,000 miles or so from Saddam’s old haunt in Iraq.
On the bright side, the US military was kind enough to grant retroactive “imminent danger” pay – a whopping 5 a month – for all the troops in Niger and Cameroon. You see, sometimes Washington doesn’t even know it’s in a barely sanctioned “imminent danger” situation, what used to be called a war, until after the fact.
• Finally, the boondoggle of all boondoggles, the original unwinnable war: Afghanistan. In this case, al-Qaeda did once operate there and the broad contours of 9/11 were planned in Afghanistan. That was 2001.
By 2002, al-Qaeda was all but finished in Afghanistan and had fled to Pakistan and other regional locales. The war didn’t end though, not by a long shot. Seventeen years on, and the US is again ramping up its longest war. Why? Because the stubborn Taliban that once harbored Osama bin Laden won’t surrender.
Honestly, though, let’s call it like it is: America’s chosen nemesis there – the Taliban – is, and essentially always was, a local actor with aspirations confined to landlocked Afghanistan. Most of these illiterate, destitute farm boys have never met any al-Qaeda.
Truth is, negotiations with the Taliban might convince these folks not to harbor al-Qaeda-classic in the future. That wouldn’t serve the Taliban’s local interests, after all, and would bring on the continued wrath of U.S. bombers and commandos.
To give a sense of how far off the rails US policy has gone in Afghanistan, American planes started bombing ethnically Uighur Chinese militants last month. Tell me how that crew relates to either of our vague AUMFs? The whole notion is absurd.
Across the Greater Mideast today, the US is bogged down in a growing number of dubiously legal wars it can’t seem to win. One look at the strategic map tells a gloomy tale: The US military, ensnared in country upon country, is unable to achieve victory and unwilling to prudently withdraw.
The US position in Syria and Iraq is tenuous as ever. American soldiers are surrounded by hostile adversaries and unreliable frenemies on all sides: Iran, Russia, Turkey, Assad, and Hezbollah.
Matters are even worse than they appear. There’s no discernible strategy, folks. The US holds a bad hand and is playing it badly. The American people hardly care, media coverage these days is all Russia, all the time, and Congress has these wars on autopilot.
Furthermore, seen through foreign eyes – which matter, by the way – there’s a distinct gap between US public pronouncements about liberty and sovereignty and America’s adherence to the international laws governing such ideals.
Behind the standard American-freedom rhetoric, and beneath the surface lies an unspoken truth: The USA flouts international law when it suits American interests and stretches domestic authorizations to their breaking point in the name of perpetual, doomed warfare.
We the people are all complicit, until, that is, we demand that Congress do its constitutional duty and specifically approve (or shut down) the forever wars.
Democracy dies in the darkness exuded by the clouds of foreign wars. The fate of the republic – what remains of it – hangs in the balance.
The US may be a republic or an empire. It may not be both. Now is the time for choosing.
Major Danny Sjursen, an Antiwar.com regular, is a U.S. Army officer and former history instructor at West Point. He served tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan.
He has written a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghost Riders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge. He lives with his wife and four sons in Lawrence, Kansas. Follow him on Twitter at @SkepticalVet and check out his new podcast “Fortress on a Hill,” co-hosted with fellow vet Chris ‘Henri’ Henrikson.
Return of the Neo-Cons: Mike Pompeo and the Death of Diplomacy
by Maj. Danny Sjursen Posted on March 16, 2018
Secretary Tillerson was far from an ideal choice, but his anointed successor at the State Department – Mike Pompeo – may ditch diplomacy all together and start a war!
We both attended West Point. That’s where the commonalities end. I’ve been a soldier opposed to (endless) war; he’ll be a statesman opposed to peace. That should give us cause for pause.
It is a sad day indeed when one finds himself pining for Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. But that’s where we are. I never really bought into the whole success in profit-driven business equates to success in diplomacy thing. Besides, let us not forget that Tillerson gutted the State Department, failed to fill key posts, and fought to cut his own budget.
That was shocking, especially given that the sitting Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, once asserted, back when he was a marine general, that if the State budget was cut, “he’d need to buy more bullets.” Nonetheless, Tillerson is out and CIA director Mike Pompeo – a far more alarming choice – is nominated to replace him.
Maybe the notoriously thin-skinned president couldn’t abide being called a “moron” by a senior cabinet secretary. Still, publicly at least, the president seemed to indicate that it was “serious policy differences” which led to the firing.
Given that Secretary Tillerson regularly tempered Trump’s more extreme proposals – like tearing up the Iran deal, threatening “fire and fury” in North Korea, and backing the Saudi blockade of tiny Qatar – and that Mike Pompeo is a known Trump supplicant, that’s all the more disquieting.
The only bright spot in the move is that Trump decided not to elevate Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) – a reported frontrunner and notorious neoconservative hawk – to replace Pompeo at CIA.
Nevertheless, Trump’s choice of Gina Haspel to take over the agency is potentially disturbing. Haspel served during the dark days of Bush-era torture; even notorious hawk John McCain (R-Az.) has expressed concern about her potential complicity in the torture regime, though a full accounting will no doubt come out in her confirmation hearings.
So who is Mike Pompeo? The short answer: a startlingly hawkish Tea Party Republican oilman with a penchant for combative rhetoric and a near hysterical hatred for Iran. But he’s smart – valedictorian of his West Point class and a graduate of Harvard – and that makes him even more dangerous.
His primary qualification, though, is his loyalty and propensity for mind-melding with his boss, Donald Trump. For the last year, he often personally delivered Trump’s presidential daily briefing (PDB) at the White House each morning and they agree on just about everything; as Trump says of Pompeo: “we’re always on the same wavelength.”
What exactly can Americans expect from a Secretary Pompeo? It’s hard to know, for sure, but his past actions and statements offer plenty of hints.
A neocon ideologue, he’ll no doubt be a savvy political actor; in a Washington where no one seems to remain for long in Donald Trump’s good graces, Pompeo has consistently impressed his boss. Last year, Harvard’s Stephen Walt called him “the most politically motivated CIA director since perhaps [Reagan-appointed] William Casey.”
He’s also pretty fanatical on a range of civil liberties issues. Pompeo is a staunch supporter of domestic surveillance, and even called for the death penalty for Edward Snowden. Steven Aftergood, a director at the Federation of American Scientists told reporters that “Mr. Pompeo is literally an extremist.”
The bigger issue is Pompeo’s neoconservative predisposition for preventive war and expansive military intervention. He’s basically a charter member of the Iran-hysteria-club dominating the contemporary Republican (and sometimes Democratic) establishment. Pompeo wants to immediately tear up the Iran deal, which will leave the U.S. as the sole party to pull out of the seven nation accord.
Back in 2014, when Pompeo was still a Kansas Congressman, he boasted that it would take only “2000 sorties to destroy [i.e. bomb] the Iranian nuclear capacity.” Well, Director Pompeo, what happens the day after the US starts a war with Iran? What are the second and third-order regional effects? None of that seems important to the likes of Pompeo; he wants war with Iran, and he might just get it.
Furthermore, while CIA Director, he ordered the release of files that purportedly proved collusion between Al Qaeda and Iran. Never mind that Bin Laden and the Islamic State were longtime antagonists on opposites sides of the regional Sunni-Shia divide.
Pompeo knows what he’s doing. These were the same devious tricks another neocon administration – that of George W. Bush – used to sell a deceitful invasion of Iraq. Soldiers like mine paid the price for that disaster on the streets of Baghdad. Pompeo’s a West Pointer; he should know that real American men and women will be the ones to die in the next reckless war – the one he seems to want in Iran.
It is hard to say if America has ever had a Secretary of State more pugnacious and bellicose than the Secretary of Defense, but that’s where the country will likely be in 2018, with Mike Pompeo at the helm of State. Pompeo, it appears, wants war, but it is Mattis who truly knows war; and though they’re both rather hawkish in foreign affairs, my bet is on Mattis – the Marine Corps general, no less – to exercise more caution in a crisis.
That, needless to say, is disturbing. America’s already got a Department of Defense. If Pompeo sits atop State, the US might as well ditch the veneer of diplomacy and rename the agency – call it the Department of War.
[Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author, expressed in an unofficial capacity, and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the US government.]
I feel great!
Every comment here on a Yahoo News article about Bolton’s appointmemnt is anti-Israel. Americans are finally waking up!
Fatema15 hours ago — John Bolton joined the National Guard in the late sixties to avoid being drafted for Vietnam War.
Randy P18 hours ago — Is Israel a U.S. state?? I sometimes get confused..
Robert yesterday — Bolton can now be the disgraceful face of the US with automatic support of any orders from Israel and AIPAC. Israel has NEVER supported the US in our wars as have our real allies. Always one-way! Israel and Bolton want war with Iran; with US funding, weapons and blood!
There isn’t a war he doesn’t like. NUKE N. Korea with millions of S. Korean and US lives at stake? Why not? Condone the Illegal 50 year brutal occupation and mistreatment of Palestinians? If Bolton, our bought congress and Israel say so!
Steve yesterday — Someone needs to tell Bolton Israel isn’t the 51st state
joanne yesterday — And we worry about Russian meddling? It’s Israel’s meddling and selecting our leaders that’s the greatest risk to the United States. This guy, like Kushner and Schumer, is ONLY committed to Israel.
REALITY CHECK yesterday — Hey Bolton.. A message from the people. NO MORE WARS FOR ISRAEL..
NotAnIsraeliTroll yesterday — Hasn’t been a Republican president with any brains since Eisenhower. Not coincidentally he was the last one to say no to Israel..
ROBERT yesterday — Another Israel puppet who is determined to get the US into a war with Iran
roygbiv 17 hours ago — From the short list of “might as well be Jews,” Trump picked the top of the heap.
Tom yesterday — Unbelievable that John Bolton is still involved in our Government. His loyalty is with Israel First which means more of America’s working classes will be fighting & dying for Israel’s benefit. Are most Americans really that naive?
REALITY CHECK yesterday — Pretty much all you need to know…
Another pro-israel mole making foreign policy..
West yesterday — The USS Liberty attack…. Israeli pilot: “But sir, It’s an American ship. I can see its flag.” Israeli ground controller: “Never mind. Hit her.”
And thus Israelis w/o a moral compass deliberately and with forethought knowingly attacked the American ship USS Liberty on June 8, 1967, murdering 34 US sailors and wounding 171, a day that will live in infamy. And remember, they even machine-gunned the Liberty’s lifeboats as our guys tried to escape in them. They wanted no survivors (witnesses).
Ironically, the only pilot among them who had a moral compass, refused to attack an American ship, and returned to base, where he was arrested by other Israelis w/o moral compasses and served several years in prison. And notice, that by Israel imprisoning for several years the only pilot who refused to fire on the USS Liberty, a supposed ally, it puts the nail in their coffin, proves their treachery.
REALITY CHECK yesterday — Trump blunders into the Middle East with his coterie of pro-Israel, anti-Muslim, anti-Iranian and anti-Palestinian Jews…Jared Kushner, Senior Adviser, 31 year old Stephen Miller, Senior adviser, Trump speechwriter and co-author of the “Muslim ban”, David Friedman, dual citizen and pro illegal “settlements” Ambassador to Israel (and Trump bankruptcy lawyer), and Jason Greenblatt, pro illegal “settlements” Mid East envoy, Mark Dubowitz, “adviser” on Iran, and now Bolton. (and then there’s Israel-worshipping Christian evangelical Pence).
Trump bombs Syria, raids Yemen, threatens Iran and sells the Saudis 0 billion in weapons. Peace with these ludicrous hypocrites at the helm?
And btw.. Prior to joining the Trump administration, son-in-law Jared Kushner served on the board of the Friends of IDF, a nonprofit “charity” that raises funds for the Israeli military. His family contributes 100s of thousands of $$$ to the illegal “settlements”.
And.. he was found to have colluded with Israel to block the UN vote condemning the illegal israeli “settlements”. This is the Trump choice to make peace b/w the Palestinians and the “jewish state”? Laughable..
Toad Y 18 hours ago — For any “collusion” in “US” politics, start the investigation with Jerry Kushner, Nuttenyahoo, Israel.
Murika 18 hours ago — Welcomed by Israelis? He was picked by Israelis, and AIPAC, is more like it. More evidence that Israel doesn’t care about the USA.
West yesterday — Excerpt from the book “The Birth of Israel” by Israeli author, Simha Flapan: “For the entire day of April 9, 1948, Irgun and LEHI soldiers carried out the slaughter in a cold and premeditated fashion… The attackers ‘lined men, women and children up against the walls and shot them,’… The ruthlessness of the attack on Deir Yassin shocked Jewish and world opinion alike, drove fear and panic into the Arab population, and led to the flight of unarmed civilians from their homes all over the country.”
Menachem Begin hailed the taking of Deir Yassin as a “splendid act of conquest that would serve as a model for the future”. In a note to his commanders he wrote: “Tell the soldiers: you have made history in Israel with your attack and your conquest. Continue thus until victory. As in Deir Yassin and everywhere else, we will attack and smite the enemy. God, God, Thou has chosen us for conquest.”
JimF yesterday — Aipac puppet, 9/11 perp, WMD liar only serves the interests of Israel and the Mossad.
Santa yesterday — “He’s a friend of Israel”
That’s code for “he supports our Illegal Zionist occupation”
Snowdog yesterday — Bolton is nothing but a AIPAC puppet. Every time you put a microphone in front of him he talks about the necessity of the USA fighting Iran FOR Israel. Let the Israeli’s fight their own damn war..1 billion a year should buy plenty of bullets. Bibi just needs to do it before he’s convicted of corruption, Trump is convicted of collusion and Kushner is convicted of money laundering.
Tony Shoe yesterday — In 1992, Netanyahu, who was then a member of Israeli Parliament, said that Iran was only three to five years away from developing and securing nuclear arms. In 1995 — Netanyahu wrote that Iran was “five to seven years at most” from possessing an operational nuclear facility.
In 1996, Speaking to the US Congress, the newly elected Prime Minister said, “the international community must reinvigorate its efforts to isolate [Iran], and prevent them from acquiring atomic power.” He then added, “Only the United States can lead this vital international effort to stop the nuclearization of terrorist states. But the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close.”
Again in 2009. While speaking to a Congressional delegation visiting Israel, he complained that Iran’s “tentacles” were choking Israel. He also added, that according to “our experts”, Iran was only 1-2 years away from gaining nuclear devices.
2012’s assertion that Iran was on the cusp of becoming nuclear was possibly Netanyahu’s most hyperbolic and vehement to date. In an address to the United Nations General Assembly, he said “it’s only a few months, possibly a few weeks before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb.” He also went on at great length to paint Iran as the most menacing force on the planet.
Phrases such as “world’s most dangerous terrorist regime” and “driven by a lust for violence” were used by Netanyahu to describe the Iranians. The boy is still crying WOLF.
Chris 18 hours ago — So he will serve Israel.. I mean America well…
Chris X. 9 hours ago — Bolton is a disgusting warmonger.
Montague 7 hours ago — DidI miss something. What about the Israelis who are on the left who think Bolton could be the worst person that trump hired to date.
Hoss Dahdouli 18 hours ago — Another terrorist in the White House……
Jim17 hours ago — I’m getting a serious case of buyer’s remorse. This man along with his neocon cohorts convinced that moron George Bush to go and invade Iraq and set off this entire disaster that is the Middle East. he should be in jail not in the White House. And we’re still there!
Julius 15 hours ago — The GOP still SUCKING UP to Israel and Bibi the Liar. Remember when we had a Pres FOR America, Obama, who put Bibi in his place, and NOT a GOP Suckup to Israel HARMING America and the Peace efforts.
Arthur 9 hours ago — Graduated #$%$-hole cum laude”, and still is…
JT the Truth Master15 hours ago — a.i.p.a.c. the cancer in the u.s. government.
hossain16 hours ago — beloved USA is not in his heart, AIPAC is!!!
Joseph 18 hours ago — John Bolton is a World War Criminal, with his involvement with the Iraq War and his promotion of the American Torture Program. He is a War Criminal and must be prosecuted by the World Court.
Marti yesterday — Of course the Israelis would be pleased that one of their sock puppets got chosen and probably had a lot to do with it!
Samy yesterday — Hmmm. Is Netanyahu behind the changes in the White House? Netanyahe said that the used to sleep in Jard Kushner’s bedroom when he visited his house when he was a kid. So, now the Untied States foreign policy became a family affair to benefit the Apartheid Regime.
Just a week or so before the “McMaster Out, Bolton In” announcement, McMaster made a speech at the Ministry of Truth’s Propa-Drama Division’s Government Organized “Non-Government” Organization (GONGO) the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, the Judeo-Christian Cathedral of Post-Auschwitz Holocaustian Theology and Indoctrination
Figtrees and Vineyards
McMaster Threatens Russia in Speech at Holocaust Museum; is there a ‘Jewish Agenda’ at Work?
Departing US National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster believes the Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C. is holy ground. He said so in a recent speech there.
“We are gathered together this afternoon on holy ground,” he proclaimed.
Yesterday it was reported that McMaster has been ousted from his position in the Trump administration.
While there were subtle nuances in views on such things as Russia and the JCPOA agreement with Iran, the “personal chemistry” between Trump and McMaster probably had at least as much, if not more, to do with the latter’s departure than anything else.
And the general’s speech at the Holocaust Museum, I would contend–a speech given on the 7th anniversary of the outbreak of the war in Syria–offers us some interesting insights into why the anti-Russia hysteria emanating from Washington has ramped up to such dangerous levels.
You can go here to access a Politico report on the speech, and here to see a video of it uploaded by the US State Department.
As you will observe, McMaster devoted much of the talk to fulminating against Russia. The program also abounded with the usual rhetoric against Syria and Iran.
“Unfortunately today in Syria we are confronted with some of the worst atrocities known to man,” McMaster declared, and he went on to adjure that “the Russian government has bombed civilian areas and provided political cover for Assad’s crimes.”
Some of the worst atrocities known to man? McMaster ludicrously seems to be suggesting that President Assad, whose ouster has been openly called for by both US and Israeli officials, may be “worse than Hitler,” as it were. It is a sign that desperation to remove him is reaching new levels.
Significantly, the talk was given on March 15, which as I say was the 7th anniversary of the outbreak of the war in Syria–and at several points during the program McMaster made reference to a “Syria exhibit” there at the museum.
“The Syria exhibit here at the Holocaust Museum details these horrifying crimes through photographs, film, first person accounts, and other documentary evidence. It is estimated that nearly 500,000 people have perished since the war began,” he said.
Throughout, the following image was projected onto a large screen upon the stage from which the general gave his talk:
Question: Why would the Holocaust Museum, an entity presumably devoted to remembering an event in history, insert itself into the contemporary politics of regime change in the Middle East?
Does it not suggest that the agenda of overthrowing the Assad government may be quintessentially a “Jewish agenda”?
In that regard, another point to consider is this: Russia is the chief reason why, after seven long years, the efforts to overthrow Assad have gone up in smoke.
Imagine. All the money, resources, time and effort spent recruiting, arming, and training terrorist proxies, and nothing to show for it other than heaps of dead bodies and whole areas reduced to rubble. Despite all that, Assad remains leader of Syria.
Imagine the pent up fury this has triggered in certain circles in Washington…and probably elsewhere. Do you really doubt that pitting the US in a war against Russia is an option that has not been considered?
So should we consider the bringing about of such a war a part of the aforementioned “Jewish agenda”?
Many political analysts would say what’s being played out now, vis-à-vis the escalating tensions between the US and Russia, is a “neocon agenda.”
Or, alternately, that the “Deep State” or the “Military Industrial Complex” are behind it all.
But McMaster’s speech at the Holocaust Museum on the anniversary of the start of the war strikes me as an oddity, a red flag almost.
If you were Sherlock Holmes trying to solve the puzzle of a murder mystery it’s certainly a piece of evidence you wouldn’t overlook.
The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (as it is officially called) is located adjacent to the National Mall in Washington, some ten blocks from the White House.
According to Wikipedia, it has approximately 400 employees and is run by a governing board called the United States Holocaust Memorial Council, a body whose membership includes 55 individuals appointed by the president of the United States.
The Council also includes five members of the US Senate and five members of the House of Representatives. Congressional members include Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ted Deutch, and Marco Rubio of Florida; Lee Zeldin of New York; Brad Schneider of Illinois; Orrin Hatch of Utah; and Bernie Sanders of Vermont.
The current chairman is Howard M. Lorber, chairman and CEO of Vector Group Ltd., a holding company listed on the New York Stock Exchange. He is chairman also of Nathan’s Famous, a fast food chain.
While in college, Lorber was a member of the Alpha Epsilon Pi fraternity, an experience which, according to Wikipedia, “had a large impact on his Jewish identity, and as such he endowed a position within the organization called the Lorber Director of Jewish Programming.”
Alpha Epsilon Pi, by the way, is a fraternity that is “based upon Jewish principles.”
Supposedly it is open to all who espouse its “purpose and values,” however, some have questioned whether this is indeed the case since the fraternity is said to have “expelled non-Jewish members from some of its chapters.”
Lorber reportedly has known Trump for more than 30 years.
The day McMaster gave his speech at the museum was also the day the US, UK, France, and Germany issued a joint statement on the Salisbury nerve agent poisoning, a statement in which the NATO members judged it “highly likely” that Russia was behind the attack.
In fact, McMaster even made mention of the statement in his speech that same day.
“This morning the United States, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom condemned the abhorrent nerve agent attack on Sergei and Yulia Skripal that took place in Salisbury, United Kingdom on March 4,” he said.
“The statement made clear that we believe that Russia was responsible for this attack, and we call on the Russian government to answer all questions related to this incident and to provide full information to the OPCW.”
Other commenters, from George Galloway to Paul Craig Roberts, have covered extensively why it would have been absurd for Russia to carry out such an attack, so I’m not going to waste space on it here.
What I’d like to do instead is posit the theory of an historical continuum.
What we are seeing now, with all the venomous rancor being directed against Russia, is not solely the result of Russia’s entry into the Syrian war in 2015; it in fact has relatively little to do with that; it also has little or nothing to do with Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, nor does it trace its roots back to the outset of the Syrian war in 2011.
It did not begin with Assad’s becoming president of Syria in the year 2000, nor with Putin’s assuming the leadership of Russia in 1999.
What we are seeing is not a “new cold war,” a throwback to the 1950s and 60s; nor did it even commence with the Holocaust in the 1940s and 30s.
No. What we are seeing now began much earlier. Much earlier. It is a continuum that stretches back for 2000 years–all the way back to the crucifixion of Christ.
A dictionary definition of “continuum” is: “a continuous extent, succession, or whole, no part of which can be distinguished from neighboring parts except by arbitrary division”…and…“a continuous series or whole, no part of which is perceptibly different from the adjacent parts.”
In other words, a continuum, particularly an historical continuum, could be thought of as a play of many acts. In this case, the play started in the time of Christ–and it has yet to reach its conclusion.
I say this because anger at Christ and Christianity seems to be embedded in the collective Jewish psyche.
Jews for centuries have blamed Christians for their problems. Certainly a lot has changed since the Second Vatican Council and the onset of the era of “interfaith dialog” (an era which has coincided with the rise of Christian Zionism), and the ill-will between Christians and Jews today is nowhere near what it used to be.
Now, rather than Christians, it is the Muslim world which Jews, or Israeli Jews at any rate, find themselves at war against, yet the old resentments are still there– bubbling underneath though surfacing from time to time in such forms as negative portrayals of Christians in Hollywood films and TV shows.
Alleged “Christian anti-Semitism” is something that many Jews harbor seething resentments over. And this is why I say a continuum is in effect…and why such a continuum should be taken into consideration when forming an analysis of current events.
The key events in this continuum are:
→ The crucifixion of Christ in 30 A.D.;
→ Destruction of the Jewish temple exactly 40 years later;
→ Third Jewish revolt crushed by the Romans in 136 A.D.;
→ Rome renames Judea “Syria Palestina”; some Jews remain; others disperse to other regions;
→ The compilation, starting in early 3rd century, of the Talmud (in which Jesus is reviled);
→ The compilation, in the 7th century, of the Quran (in which Jesus is revered);
→ Conversion to Judaism by the Khazars in the 8th century;
→ Khazar Kingdom defeated by joint Russian-Byzantine force in the 10th century; Khazarian Jews disperse to Eastern Europe;
→ 11th-20th centuries: Jews expelled from roughly 100 countries or regions;
→ 1933-45: Hitler comes to power; Jews placed in camps; World War II is fought
→ 1948: Israel established; more than 700,000 Palestinians dispersed from their villages and homes;
→ 1951: AIPAC is founded and Jewish power begins to grow in America
Russia is the most powerful Christian nation on earth. Yes, its power and influence are viewed as threatening to US global hegemony, but the irrational threats and accusations being made against it, the heightening of tensions to almost unprecedented levels, can be fully understood only within the context of the above continuum.
Likewise the threats against Assad and Syria.
Bashar Assad is a secular leader who has protected Christians. If terrorism is truly the concern of US officials, why single out Assad as the enemy?
Why not Saudi Arabia instead? Assad is actually fighting the very terrorists Washington professes such concern over. Assad has ensured that Christians in Syria, at least in areas controlled by the government, remain free to practice their religion.
Their churches and monasteries are protected. In fact, Assad arguably has done more to unify Christians and Muslims than any other national leader, certainly in the Middle East–and this may be the real reason he is hated so much.
Here is a video which I posted on December 30, 2015. It shows Assad and his wife, Asma, visiting a Church in Damascus during Christmas that year:
The church is the Notre Dame de Damas Church, an ancient cathedral located just two kilometers from the militant-held area of East Ghouta. The people you see in this video are probably some of those who have suffered most from terrorist shells fired from East Ghouta. The more the Syrian Army has closed in on these terrorists, establishing humanitarian corridors for trapped civilians, the louder have become the howls of protest from the mainstream media and US officials. And yes, a case in point–McMaster’s speech on the 15th.
“The war has now raged for seven years. The Assad regime has killed indiscriminately, tortured, starved, raped, and used chemical weapons on his own people. It has attacked hospitals and schools, and countless Syrians have been arrested, abducted, or simply disappeared,” he claimed.
This wasn’t the only reference to the Syrian “regime” reputedly killing its “own people.” In fact throughout his talk, McMaster repeatedly referred to “Assad’s use of chemical weapons,” as if it were a proven, undisputed fact. And almost laughably–despite America’s documented support for terrorists in Syria, including the Nour al-Din al-Zenki movement, which in 2016 filmed themselves beheading a 12-year-old Palestinian boy–he touted the US as a “civilized nation.”
“All civilized nations must hold Iran and Russia accountable for their role in enabling atrocities and perpetuating human suffering in Syria,” he insisted…and he issued a demand:
If Iran and Russia do not stop enabling the regime’s atrocities and adhere to Security Council resolutions, all nations must respond more forcefully than simply issuing strong statements. It is time to impose serious political and economic consequences on Moscow and Tehran.
I suppose we should breathe a sigh of relief that McMaster didn’t call for an all-out military invasion of Russia–and that so far no other US official has issued such a call either. But that being said, it’s hard to imagine what further “political and economic consequences” could be imposed that would not lead to war.
Is it just a coincidence that Vladimir Putin, president of the most powerful Christian nation on earth, and Bashar Assad, a head-of-state who has worked toward Muslim-Christian unity, would be held up by US leaders and mainstream media as objects of vilification and demonization? Did that simply happen by chance? Or is there a continuum in effect? A continuum that has resulted in a Jewish agenda that is now leading us toward global confrontation?
The lies tirelessly generated by mainstream media on Syria are discussed in an article published a couple of days ago by independent journalist Eva Bartlett.
“As per their norm, corporate media’s reports on Eastern Ghouta rely on the usual suspect sources,” Bartlett says.
One of the “usual suspect sources” heavily relied upon for a good while now has been the infamous White Helmets. This proved to be the case in McMaster’s speech as well–in fact, from his podium the general recognized and applauded two members of the so-called humanitarian organization present at the time–present in the halls of the Holocaust Museum in Washington. “Let’s give them a round of applause,” he urged. The audience obliged.
Bartlett also discusses an article by Sharmine Narwani that was published a few days prior to her own, an article in which Narwani discusses her experience of visiting, and seeing with her own eyes, a chemical weapons laboratory discovered by the Syrian Arab Army in a recently-liberated portion of East Ghouta. Narwani’s article, which includes photos taken inside the lab, can be viewed here.
But yet McMaster and other US officials go on asserting that it is Assad, rather than terrorist saboteurs, resorting gawkishly to chemical attacks–and they state their opinion on this matter almost uniformly, as if singing in a chorus.
McMaster, in his position as National Security Advisor, participated regularly in meetings of the National Security Council. He presumably had access to CIA intelligence on the situation in Syria. If the CIA is even remotely competent then would it not know, or at least have a fairly good idea, who is manufacturing and using chemical weapons in Syria? If the answer to that question is no, then it inevitably begs a second question, somewhat more trenchant and sardonic than the first: do CIA agents, tasked with gathering, processing and analyzing national security information, derive their intelligence assessments from reading the mainstream media?
Of course the other alternative is that the US national interest has now been replaced by some other agenda.
Bartlett’s article, well worth reading in its entirety, is headlined, ‘They know that we know they are liars, they keep lying’: West’s war propaganda on Ghouta crescendos.”
In it, she also cites a group of Trappist nuns in Syria–and even provides a couple of quotes from one of them. Here is what she writes:
“We, the people who actually live in Syria, we are really exhausted, nauseated by this global indignation that issues blanket condemnations of those who defend their lives and their land.
“The attacks on civilians in Damascus, began from the Ghouta area into the government-controlled part, and not vice versa… Why this blindness on the part of the West?”
You can well understand why the nuns would feel nauseated. So thorough has been the distortion of reality that soldiers of the Syrian Army, the very young men who have given their lives to protect the nuns and other innocent Syrians, have been portrayed as the evildoers.
Bartlett herself then goes on to comment:
“It is a painful rhetorical question that many of us have asked over the years, well-aware of the answer: because it doesn’t serve the regime-change agenda, one so diligently put forth by the corporate media.”
As the war propaganda continues, I quote the nuns, who said: “Deliver us Lord from the war… and deliver us from bad journalism.”
I’ll close here with a quote from Jesus–it is the 9th beatitude, from the 5th chapter of Matthew, a quote which Russians and Syrians generally, and most especially Vladimir Putin and Bashar Assad in particular, would do well to keep in mind:
“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
I’ll also offer a quote from John, from his first epistle, a passage in which this beloved disciple of Jesus discusses the crucial importance of love. What he is outlining here is the most fundamental of all Christian concepts:
God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them. This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus. There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.
It is vital that we continue to live in love rather than succumb to the hatred of other nations and peoples–hatreds that are being deliberately fomented.
It is also important that we understand the continuum, to recognize that it is still in effect, and that most likely there are further acts in the play that are yet to come.
These do not have to include World War III, however. It is not mandated that the play end tragically.
For the choice of how it ends is our own–and the possibility of choosing love, rather than fear and hate, lies with all of us.
On March 21st The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned all ambassadors to Russia to a briefing on the Skripal case.
The MFA’s Director of the Department for Non-Proliferation and Arms Control in exceptional diplomatic manner spoke frankly and directly.
He called out the UK and the West for the willful disregard from proper international procedure and due process according to agreed upon rules, their illogical accusative horse manure, and the insane propaganda war against Russia over the Skripal case.
Director Yermikov goes through every point of the UK’s accusations and refutes or points out the flaws in the UK’s accusations.
The French, Swedish and US representative at the meeting all stood up to declare their “solidarity” with the UK.
21 March 201821:29
Briefing by Director of the Foreign Ministry Department for Non-Proliferation and Arms Control Vladimir Yermakov, Moscow, March 21, 2018 (English)
Also see: Vesti: New Details From the Skripal Case: Boris Johnson Admits UK Had Poison AND Even Antidote
There are new details in the case of the poisoning of the British agent Skripal and his daughter.
New Scotland Yard has impounded the vehicle in which Yulia had arrived. The cop who found the Skripals in Salisbury has come out of his coma and is giving his testimony. The victims are doing better, too.
Transcript exerpt from Vesti news video:
Vesti: 1:39 New Scotland Yard stated the Skirpal and his daughter were poisoned by the A-234 nerve agent. It really surprised professional chemists. Here’s why.
1:44 Dmitry Gladyshev, an expert in poisonous substances: “You need samples for clear identification. This means that the UK chemists had to have the substance used to poison Skripal.”
1:55 It turns out that the UK special services do have this substance. The UK’s MFA rep Boris Johnson casually mentioned it in his interview with Deutsche Welle.
2:05 Boris Johnson, UK’s MFA rep: “I’m very sad to see what’s happening. And when I looked at the results from the Porton Down lab…”
2:15 Nemtsova: So they have samples? Johnson: “Yes, they do. And they were very distinct in their conclusion.”
2:22 Experts also distinctly believe that if the substance were used, Skripal and his daughter would’ve died on the spot.
2:27 Glayshev: “This poses another question. Why didn’t they die? This means they had taken an antidote.
“Another question. If they took the antidote, who gave it to them? The UK gave it to them, the British did. This means they knew what they were poisoned with. This really looks like an operation.”
2:50 Despite these statements, London is still demanding an explanation from Russia.
Transcribed excerpt from Deutsche Welle. Sure enough, ol’ Boris the Bozo said that the UK already had samples to compare the suspect toxin with.
The DW video entirely supports as fact what Vesti reported, Vesti, however, edited out all of Boris the Boyo’s waffling, stammering, and efforts to lie.
Archbishop Gabriel is spot on with his analysis of the UK episode being a political scam and provocation from +BN’s interview with him a few days ago:
The Russian Spy Poisoning Scam
Boris Johnson: Russia’s position in Skripal case is increasingly bizarre (video)
In an interview with DW’s Zhanna Nemtsova, UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson talked about why London believes Russia is responsible for the poisoning of ex-spy Sergei Skripal and what lessons Britain learned from the murder of Alexander Litvinenko.
04:39 Nemtsova: How did you manage to find it out so quickly? Does Britain possess samples of this?
04:46 Johnson: Well, we, I, we, I, I, interrogated very closely, as you can — this is a very, I mean let me be very clear with you, I am, uh, I wanted, when I became foreign secretary, uh almost two years ago, one of my objectives was to try to reach out to Russia. I really did.
And I, I, went to see Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, against the advice of some people by the way. They said it was a totally futile venture. But I wanted, you know, because I genuinely think that Russia is an incredible country, fantastic place. And it pains me to see the way things have got between us. And…so…I’m genuinely distressed by what has happened. But when I look at the evidence, I mean the people from Porton Down, the, the laboratory–
05:39 Nemtsova: They have a samples, yea?
05:40 Johnson: They do, and, and, they, they, they, they were absolutely categorical. And I asked the guy, so I said, ‘Are you sure?’ And he said, ‘There’s no doubt.’ So, um…and we have very little alternative to take the action we have taken.
But I must say, the difference between this time and what happened 12 years ago with Alexander Livenenko, there is also much more sympathy in the international community, far more understanding of the kind of behavior Russia has been engaged in, in the last few years.
And round the table here in Brussels talking to all the European countries, there’s hardly anybody who hasn’t experienced directly or indirectly, some kind of you know, malign or disruptive behavior.
06:33 Nemtsova: That’s understandable. But in an interview on Sunday, you mentioned that you would like to have a constructive cooperation with Russia on the issue. How do you see it, having accused Putin directly?
Thanks, Boris! You just made the UK the #1 Suspect!
In order to have an antidote, there must have been the actual toxin to work from.
Russia’s answer that you’re demanding should be “the UK did it”.
At this point, Boris, most of the world outside of the UK and the lunatic Western political class have caught on to your attempted frame-up of Russia.
It seems that maybe your only option to back way out of this case of terminal stupidity that you’ve created, is to blither your way towards the conclusion that the Skripals got sick from botulin toxin food poisoning after eating at a Salisbury restaurant.
Strategic Culture: Another Russian Superweapon to Enter Service: President Putin Did Not Bluff
Technological breakthroughs are the key to success in economics and national security. Moscow recently unveiled its achievements in military innovations that are bringing forth a new paradigm in modern warfare.
It was reported on March 15 that the Avangard (known as Vanguard in English) boost-glide hypersonic delivery vehicle with an intercontinental range will be operational by 2019 or even late 2018.
It’ll be on high alert in 2019. The military has already signed the contract.
Avangard is to be installed on intercontinental missile, such as the 200-ton Sarmat ICBM.
Delivered to the desired orbit at an altitude of 100 km from the Earth using a pre-booster, it can glide to its target at a speed of Mach 20 (5-7 km/s) while maneuvering with the help of stabilizers.
This is the first mass-produced weapon with a glider warhead that can travel at such an altitude in the dense layers of the atmosphere.
The boost-glider vehicle can also abruptly change course. The system produces signatures, which are quite different from traditional intercontinental systems, to hinder attempts to spot and engage it.
The use of composite materials enables the re-entry vehicle to resist temperatures up to 2,000 degrees Celsius.
It can fly within plasma and the glider is also protected from laser irradiation. The system passed its trials with flying colors.
The weapon is perfectly suited for knocking out an enemy’s critical infrastructure and leaving him unable to strike back. Its yield ranges from 150 kilotons to one megaton.
Russia, not the US, has been the first to achieve prompt global strike capability. That’s what makes this weapon especially important.
The Russian president wasn’t exaggerating when he described the Kinzhal hypersonic missile. Now another new system is almost ready to go, further shaming those who doubted its existence.
President Putin’s address, in which he described these new ‘super weapons,” had nothing to do with serving the interests of the military-industrial complex.
The development of the systems mentioned in this speech was prompted by the US withdrawal from the 1972 ABM Treaty.
That agreement had been the cornerstone of strategic stability until Washington pulled out in 2002, a move that was followed by the rollout of NATO missile-defense sites in Romania and Poland (this year).
The ABM Treaty was not the only major international agreement the US put an end to. Today it is openly violating the NPT treaty.
The Nuclear Posture Review released this year seeks to bury arms control.
The announced plan to breach the 1991 presidential nuclear initiatives and arm naval ships with long-range missiles is nothing but an open threat to upset the strategic balance.
The Russian president made no threats; he just wanted to explain the measures his country had to take in response.
This is quite a natural thing to do at a time when arms control is in crisis. None of the weapons systems he mentioned violates the New START Treaty. Russia never said it wanted to withdraw from the arms-control agreements still in force.
It’s the US, not Russia, who seems to doubt that the New START or INF Treaty is worth preserving. The voices clamoring to tear up the intermediate-forces agreement are getting louder in America.
There is a bumpy road ahead, so President Putin is taking steps to protect Russia’s citizens – which is exactly what he has always promised to do.
Washington bears full responsibility for having convinced Moscow it needed to strengthen its defenses.
Now America lags behind Russia in military technology that makes it possible for super weapons to be produced and added to the active arsenal. Tu l’as voulu, George Dandin!
21st Century Wire: Sunday Screening:
RT: ‘Zashto?’ (Why?) – Revisiting NATO’s Bombing of Yugoslavia (2014)
This week’s documentary film curated by our editorial team at 21WIRE.
It’s been 19 years since NATO launched its illegal 78-day bombardment of Yugoslavia. The memories of the bombing still haunt the residents of Serbia today.
Under the order of US President Bill Clinton, NATO managed to kill over 2,000 people, including hundreds of civilians, of which 88 were children.
Serbs ask ‘why?’ above all. Why did NATO smash their cities, kill their children, bomb hospitals and schools? RT presents ‘Zashto?’ (Why?) on the trauma of terror waged against Serbia by the Western war machine.
Watch RT’s award-winning presenter Anissa Naouai in this stunning emotional and heart-felt documentary journey, discovering the disturbing truth about what really happened in 1999.
Most people in the West also have no idea of the scale of Clinton and NATO’s deliberate targeting and systematic wholesale aerial and ground destruction of medieval Serbian Orthodox churches and monasteries as well as part of the ethnic cleansing of Serbs, particularly in Kosovo.
112 Serbian churches and monasteries in Kosovo were destroyed in the NATO bombing.
What ruins were incompletely destroyed by the air strikes were further looted, burned, defaced and reduced to rubble which was soon bulldozed and hauled away to bare ground.
During March 1999 violent pogroms against the Kosovo Serbs and further destruction and vandalism of holy sites broke out, thought by observers including NATO’s commander in Southern Europe, Admiral Gregory Johnson, to be pre-planned, ethnic Albanian mobs attacked Serbian homes, churches and schools throughout Kosovo.
The attacks took place despite the presence of KFOR and UNMIK, the local KPS, and the KZK (Kosovo Protection Force).
The pogrom violence left 19 people dead, 250 homes looted and burned, as well as 30 churches and monasteries and several graveyards heavily damaged, looted, burned or destroyed.
With the previously destroyed 112 churches and monasteries, this brought the total number destroyed since international forces took over responsibility for Kosovo in 1999 to 140.
Kosovo, more properly the province of Kosovo and Metohia, is the 1200 year old cradle of Serbian Orthodoxy — the “New Jerusalem” of Serbian Christian national identity and civilization.
The Metohia part of the name is very telling and extremely important as evidence in the struggle to reverse NATO-sponsored theft of Serbian territory. Metohia is the SW part of the Serbian southern province of Kosovo and Metohia. The name comes from Greek μετόχια (metókhia), meaning “monastic estates.” Serbian = Metohija.
Emperor Justinian I, who assumed the throne of the Roman Empire in 527, oversaw a period of expansion into former Roman territories, (partially so in former Occidental Roman provinces) and re-absorbed the area of Kosovo into the empire.
Slavic migrations to the Roman Balkans took place between the early 6th to 7th centuries. The name Kosovo is derived from a Serbian place-name meaning “field of blackbirds”.
In the absence of written or archaeological evidence of genocide or mass relocation of existing populations, it may be assumed that the genetic origins of the Slavic-speaking populations today include large elements of pre-existing populations, who adopted Slav languages for economic or social reasons.
The region of Serbian Kosovo was incorporated into the Bulgarian Empire during the reign of Khan Presian (836–852). Numerous churches and monasteries were constructed after the Christianization of Bulgaria in 864. According to De Administrando Imperio of the 10th century Roman Emperor high fashion tank dress: energetic spirit 2018 Constantine VII, the Serbian-populated lands lay to the north-west of Kosovo and the region was under Bulgarian rule.
It remained within the borders of Bulgaria for 150 years until 1018, when the country was overrun by the Romans after half-century bitter struggle, coming back under the rule of Constantinople.
There is little doubt that Kosovo and Metohia has been native territory of Serbdom since at least the 6th century AD migrations if not before, and the spiritual cradle of Serbian Orthodoxy.
Back in 2008, Bolton, then the US ambassador to the UN, spoke against his country’s recognition of Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence, stating that Kosovo would increase Balkan instability and would spark Islamic extremism in Europe.
RT (vintage video): (.youtube.com/watch?v=ouQwgLBtFcE )
B92.net: Serbia will not recognize the existence of another state in its territory, Prime Minister Ana Brnabic said last Friday, March 23.
Speaking at the international scientific conference “Kosovo and Metohija: Sui generis, or precedent in international relations,” Brnabic stressed that the conflict between the Serbs and the Albanians cannot be solved by supporting one side in each of its demands, however unreasonable it may be, and expect the other side to bow down and accept every imposed solution.
Such a thing, the prime minister continued, would not be accepted by any mature nation - in particular the Serb nation, which in the past paid a heavy price for its freedom and the right to make its own decisions.
“A solution must take into account the positions held by both peoples,” Brnabic stressed, and added that her country is ready to participate in solving the problem of Kosovo in a mature and responsible way, but would not recognize the existence of another state in its own territory.
She assessed that the project that is calling itself “the Republic of Kosovo” has been, and continues to be destined to fail.
“Considering that the current situation is unsustainable, it is necessary to look for some new, perhaps unique solutions in order to establish permanent stability and peace in this part of Europe,” the prime minister emphasized.
Serbian FM says he’s been warning Serbian President about the West
Foreign Minister Ivica Dacic says Western countries expect Serbia to recognize Kosovo, which he described as insolent and humiliating.
“They separated Kosovo from Serbia with bombs and now they tell us that this story is finished,” Dacic said in an interview for Friday’s edition of daily Vecernje Novosti.
Asked whether power centers in London, Washington, Paris and Berlin came before Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic with the offer that Serbia should either formally or informally recognize Kosovo - while the Community of Serb Municipalities (ZSO) is the most it can get in the southern province - Dacic said that he on several occasions in the past told Vucic that the West has been fooling Serbia all these years, and that “our recognition of Kosovo is the only thing they’re interested in.”
“They figured it out so nicely: we recognize Kosovo, and they will generously give us the ZSO which they have been unable to form for five years now…
“The Second World War ended within five years, but they’re not able to make Thaci and company implement the Brussels agreement that they (Pristina) signed,” Dacic said.
Speaking about the behavior of the West, he added:
“I think that this the height of insolence and hypocrisy, and that our country cannot accept humiliation.”
Dacic also said that a settlement between Belgrade and Pristina must come through compromise, not by imposing the stance that Serbia must recognize Kosovo.
Earlier in the week, Aleksandar Vucic said that his meetings on the issue of Kosovo in New York were difficult, and that he was not satisfied with the results.
When the interviewer remarked that Bolton, a former US ambassador to the UN, spoke against his country’s recognition of Kosovo in 2008, Dacic said that Bolton was right about everything he was saying at the time.
“We will see if he is thinking the same today,” said Dacic.
South Front: TRUMP’S NEW NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER THREATENS TO CHANGE “IRANIAN REGIME” BY 2019 (VIDEO)
The new national security adviser of US President Donald Trump, John Bolton, promised members of the Iranian opposition that the Iranian regime will be overthrown by 2019 during a meeting in the French capital of Paris eight months ago, the Intercept reported on March 25.
“Before 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran!” Bolton told members of the Iranian opposition group, People’s Mujahedin of Iran (MEK), according to the Intercept.
During the meeting, Bolton said that a regime change in Iran is needed because the current regime is not going to change its behavior and vowed to forbid the Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Khomeini from celebrating the 40th anniversary of the Iranian revolution, that’s on February 11, 2019.
The MEK, which has an armed wing, was a part of the 1979 Iranian revolution with Khomeini and even carried out some attacks against US interests in the country back then.
However, after failing to gain the power, the group has become the main opponent of the Iranian regime.
According to Iranian sources, more than 16,000 people have been killed in violent attacks conducted by the MEK inside Iran since 1979.
The attacks have included a series of assassinations and bombings, which have targeted Iranian officials and civilians.
Despite all of these crimes, the MEK has been spending millions of dollars during the last few years to present itself as a moderate group that’s ready to replace the current regime of Iran if the West decides to support a regime change war there, according to the Intercept.
Bolton’s endorsement of the MEK and his promise to overthrow the Iranian regime were not a surprise to most observers.
Killing the nuclear deal with Iran is the least to expect from the new warmonger national security adviser, according to several observers, who also believe that a US war on Iran is steadily becoming more likely.
American Conservative: Why Bolton’s MEK Connection Matters
Jason Rezaian comments on Bolton’s enthusiasm for the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) and what it means for U.S. Iran policy:
The MEK is the type of fringe group that sets up camp across the street from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and hands out fliers filled with unsubstantiated claims. This is America — we let crazy people talk. That’s their right, and I would never suggest that they be prohibited from doing that. But giving the MEK a voice in the White House is a terrible idea.
In John Bolton they have someone who will do it for them.
Now that Bolton is in such an influential position in the Trump administration, his connection with and support for the MEK pose some real dangers for the U.S.
He could use his position to funnel misinformation from the MEK to the president to distort U.S. policy in their favor. He might use his position to advocate publicly on behalf of the MEK, and that would give them a de facto endorsement from the administration.
Worse still, he could persuade the president that this totalitarian cult is the “real” Iranian opposition, which would simultaneously harm Iranian dissidents and saddle the U.S. with a discredited, deranged cult as its preferred alternative to the Iranian government.
Bolton’s connection with the MEK is not the only disqualifying thing in his record, but it is one of the more egregious red flags that should have prevented the president from ever offering him the job in the first place.
If any other group had been removed from the list of foreign terrorist organizations a few years earlier, anyone publicly advocating on their behalf while they were still on the list would have tremendous difficulty getting work with the U.S. government, much less serving as one of the most important officials in the White House.
Because the MEK hates the Iranian government, shilling for them is probably considered a plus in this administration. It is a measure of how warped the debate over Iran policy is that Bolton and others like him could openly shill for such a group without becoming pariahs.
And the MEK cult has been long supported by Israel.
Bolton, his groupy neocon hawks, the White House Likudniks, Pompeo at State, Haspel at CIA, Adelson, Netanyahu and the Mossad will get fully behind MEK and its decades old aspirations of regime change in Iran.
Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran’s nuclear scientists, U.S. officials tell NBC News
Who owns Bolton, anyway?
Sheldon “Dr. Strangelove” Adelson does.
Adelson is Trump’s best friend and gambling casino crony of 30 years and who lives and breathes only for Israhell, a huge supporter of Netanyahu, played a critical role in Bolton’s ascendency in this Game of Gilded Chamber Pots.
Trump owes him big time. Besides, the Republicans are facing the coming midterm races, John Bolton is a tool of Sheldon Adelson, and so they are holding their noses because the GOP needs Sheldon Adelson’s money in order to compete for congressional seats.
Politico reported this February past that “Desperate Republicans turn to Adelson” and were making their treks to Las Vegas to pledge fealty and “kiss the ring of a benefactor they need more than ever: casino mogul Sheldon Adelson:
“Confronting the potential loss of one or both chambers of Congress in the midterms, and struggling to raise money against an energized Democratic base, the party is desperate for Adelson’s millions.
So the praise at the annual Republican Jewish Coalition conference he hosts overflowed.”
Bolton and Adelson have been great pals since at least to 2016 immediately after Trump’s November 2016 election when Bolton was being considered as Deputy Secretary of State under Tillerson, and Adelson was his biggest booster, per the New York Times, December 2016:
“Mr. Trump is weighing whether to choose John R. Bolton, a combative and strident advocate for an expansive American foreign policy who was closely aligned with Vice President Dick Cheney in the Bush administration.”
“Another impediment is that Mr. Tillerson has expressed misgivings about having Mr. Bolton as his deputy, according to a person who has spoken with Mr. Trump in recent days. But Mr. Bolton remains under consideration for the job.
And he enjoys a powerful ally in Sheldon Adelson, the casino magnate and Republican megadonor who favors the kind of hard-nosed posture that Mr. Bolton would bring.
Mr. Adelson’s backing has gone an especially long way with Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who is expected to take on an important but still undetermined role in the new administration.”
Adelson, who lives and breathes for Israel, his only patriotic loyalty, mega-supporter of Netanyahu, is the critical mover and shaker behind Bolton’s ascendancy to a White House position where he’s answerable and accountable to only one person–Trump — also owned by Adelson.
Tel Aviv is in ecstatic jubilation, the Judeo-Neocon think tanks and Jewish cottage-industry spinoffs are dancing in the streets of the United States of Adelson.
Bolton has long and deep ties to many Israeli politicians and officials besides Adelson. Bolton’s appointment to National Security Advisor, an appointment with no congressional oversight or confirmation hearing, is simply Trump’s payback to Dr. Strangelove.
This same Dr. Strangelove Adelson — who participated in a 2013 roundtable at Yeshiva University Yeshivah president Richard Joel, Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens, and Rabbi Shmuley Boteach — stated that Obama should drop an atomic bomb on Iran, not negotiate (YT clip):
Boteach: So you would support negotiations with Iran so long as they first cease all enrichment?
Adelson: No. What do you mean support negotiations? What are we going to negotiate about? What I would say is, ‘Listen, you see that desert out there, I want to show you something.’ You pick up your cell phone, even at traveling rates.
You pick up your cell phone, and– what are they called– [Boteach: roaming charges] Roaming charges. You pick up your cell phone and you call somewhere in Nebraska and you say, ‘OK let it go.’
So there’s an atomic weapon, goes over ballistic missiles, the middle of the desert, that doesn’t hurt a soul. Maybe a couple of rattlesnakes, and scorpions, or whatever.
And then you say, ‘See! The next one is in the middle of Tehran. So, we mean business.
You want to be wiped out? Go ahead and take a tough position and continue with your nuclear development. [Applause]
You want to be peaceful? Just reverse it all, and we will guarantee you that you can have a nuclear power plant for electricity purposes, energy purposes.’
Boteach: A tremendous demonstration of American strength?
Adelson: The only thing they understand.
Boteach: So you see the current negotiations as a demonstration of weakness?]
Politico writes in their ‘Nikki Haley was Trump’s Iran whisperer’ the revelation about Bolton pulling Haley’s puppet-strings from behind the scenes, or Haley channeling Bolton, however you want to look at it:
“At a midday meeting in the Oval Office in late July, U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley came to President Donald Trump with an offer.
Trump had grudgingly declared Tehran in compliance with the 2015 Iran nuclear deal earlier in the month, at the urging of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense James Mattis. Trump hated the deal. But the two men pushed him to certify it, arguing in part that he lacked a strong case for declaring Iran in violation.
A refusal to do so would have looked rash, they said, convincing Trump to sign off for another 90 days.
Haley, in that July meeting, which also included national security adviser H.R. McMaster and Vice President Mike Pence, asked the president to let her make the case for decertification.
“Let me lay a foundation for it,” she said, according a source familiar with the proceedings. The president agreed.
Haley would become the administration’s most vocal public proponent of decertification — and Trump’s favorite internal voice on Iran — further boosting her standing with the president at a time when she is seen as a potential successor to Tillerson, whose tense relationship with Trump has burst into the open in recent days.
A month after her talk with Trump, Haley flew to Vienna to visit the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Association, where she pressed officials about Iranian compliance with the deal.
Soon after, she delivered a speech at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., airing her “doubts and concerns” about the agreement.
Haley’s role was described by a half-dozen administration officials who took part in the Iran policy review.
While many of the president’s Cabinet members, aides and advisers work to restrain his impulses, when it came to the Iran deal Haley did the opposite — channeling what many Democrats and even some Republicans consider the president’s destructive instincts into policy.
Haley wasn’t alone.
The fingerprints of former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, whose access to Trump was recently limited by chief of staff John Kelly, were also on Trump’s Friday address in the form of a warning that Trump, who opted not to push for steps that could undo the nuclear agreement, could still cancel the deal “at any time.”
The line was added to Trump’s speech after Bolton, despite Kelly’s recent edict, reached the president by phone on Thursday afternoon from Las Vegas, where Bolton was visiting with Republican megadonor Sheldon Adelson.
Bolton urged Trump to include a line in his remarks noting that he reserved the right to scrap the agreement entirely, according to two sources familiar with the conversation.Trump wound up saying that the agreement “is under continuous review, and our participation can be canceled by me, as president, at any time.”
Bolton declined to comment on any conversation with the president.”
Continued: (.politico.com/story/2017/10/13/nikki-haley-trump-iran-whisperer-243772 )
Nimrata Randhawa Haley, US Ambassador to the UN, is outed as Bolton’s sock puppet and now we know who is the real brains of the pair.
After Kelly restricted Bolton’s unfettered White House access to Trump, Bolton started going through Adelson to get to Trump, via the private White House special switchboard numbers for approved personal friends and family lists, and a variety of other back door avenues, such as personally through Bannon, before he left, and Gorka, before he left, and the Kushners.
Gareth Porter at American Conservative sheds more light on Bolton’s decade long aggressive efforts to derail any efforts to make peace with Iran:
The Untold Story of John Bolton’s Campaign for War With Iran
Everyone knows Bolton is a hawk. Less understood is how he labored in secret to drive Washington and Tehran apart.
“His is not merely a rhetorical stance: Bolton actively conspired during his tenure as the Bush administration’s policymaker on Iran from 2002 through 2004 to establish the political conditions necessary for the administration to carry out military action.
More than anyone else inside or outside the Trump administration, Bolton has already influenced Trump to tear up the Iran nuclear deal.
Bolton parlayed his connection with the primary financier behind both Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump himself—the militantly Zionist casino magnate Sheldon Adelson—to get Trump’s ear last October, just as the president was preparing to announce his policy on the Iran nuclear agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
He spoke with Trump by phone from Las Vegas after meeting with Adelson.
Dr Strangelove Adelson wants to bomb Iran, preferably with a nuke. Bolton wants to bomb Iran, with or without nukes.
Major T. J. “King” Kong, the B-52 Stratofortress bomber’s commander and pilot, from Dr Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
21st Century News Wire:
POLL: 19 Years After NATO’s Illegal Bombing of Serbia, Most Serbs Do Not Accept Apology from Brussels
On March 24, 1999, NATO launched Operation Noble Anvil, an eleven week illegal bombing of the country Yugoslavia, destroying essential civilian infrastructure, businesses, schools, hospitals, media outlets, and cultural monuments.
The US and its allies tried, but failed, to gain authorisation for its ‘humanitarian intervention’ from the United Nations Security Council, and proceded to go it alone NATO, laundering their war crime through its various compliant members like Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, and United States.
After the war had ended, a British parliamentary Foreign Affairs Select Committee (FSC), issued a 315-paragraph report admitting that the NATO operation was illegal under international law.
The report stated that NATO’s Operation Allied Force “was contrary to the specific terms of what might be termed the basic law of the international community—the UN charter.”
Still, the British argued that the illegal war was somehow justified on “humanitarian” grounds, but acknowledges that such justifications have “a tenuous basis in current international customary law, and that this renders the NATO action legally questionable.”
It was NATO’s first action against a sovereign nation – and one which Serbs are not keen to forgive.
RT International reports:
A majority of Serbs today would not accept an apology from NATO for its 1999 military intervention in Kosovo. Only 10 percent would wish to see their country become a member the trans-Atlantic defense bloc, recent poll shows.
The continued animosity towards NATO in Serbia was highlighted by an opinion poll conducted by the Belgrade-based Institute for European Affairs in mid-March.
According to the poll, only 10 percent of Serbs support membership of the military bloc while 84 percent oppose it.
The mood is particularly strong in the Serbian capital, where the level of support for NATO membership is 5.8 percent, and among young people aged 18 to 25 (7.7 percent). Only 18 percent believe that becoming an ally would be beneficial for Serbia.
Former Serb leader Slobodan Milosevic and his policies are perceived as the main reason for the bombings by 17.4 percent of Serbs. The second-most mentioned reason was that the US and Western powers were simply pursuing their interests.
It was cited by 15.2 percent of respondents. Other popular explanations included a goal to push ethnic Serbs out of Kosovo (12.6 percent) and to remove Kosovo from Serbia (10.5 percent)
If NATO were to offer Serbs an apology for the bombings, 62 percent of them would not accept it according to the poll.
The defiant attitude is most prominent among Belgrade residents (65.9 percent) and people aged 30-44 (67.3 percent), who were teens or young adults during the bombing campaign.
A majority of 66 percent said NATO bombings of Yugoslavia could have been avoided.
NATO justified its intervention in Kosovo by accusing the Milosevic government of ethnically cleansing the province.
The bombings lasted 78 days and officially claimed at least 758 civilian lives, though Serbian sources say the true figure may be double that. The violence in Kosovo followed decades of inter-ethnic alienation and tension in the province.
The loss of the province was a great symbolic blow to Serbs, who historically consider the land essential to their statehood and of great spiritual significance.
Watch this mainstream narrative retrospective of NATO’s illegal attack on the sovereign nation of Serbia: (Al Jazeera - 2009)
Nothing like stepping on a rake, only to have it flip up and smack you right between the eyes.
It’s particularly slapstick when it happens to astroturf idols of Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety squawking zombie army and puffed up high school idiots, like David Hogg, Emma González, et al.
Activist Post: FL Students Who Begged Gov’t to Take Their Rights Away, Now Angry Gov’t Took Away Their Rights
After the tragic shooting in Parkland, Florida last month, a group of anti-gun high school children became the darlings of the anti-gun movement.
They were given widespread coverage and platforms on all mainstream media networks to call for the disarming of Americans.
They were sanctioned by the government to do so—and now they are getting what they asked for—less rights.
In the Land of the Free, marching for change used to mean that you were standing up to the government to demand more or equal rights.
Fast forward to 2018, however, and it is the exact opposite.
The mainstream media and the government tells us that these students are brave for walking out of class and demanding change—but how is it brave to be used as a tool of the State?
Activism involves challenging the establishment and what these kids were tricked into doing is not activism.
Earlier this month, millions of students across the country were encouraged by the government, mainstream media, and even their own school systems to walk out of class and demand the government take away their rights.
It was, by no means, a challenge of authority and, in fact, it was a celebration of it.
Schools across the country not only sanctioned it, but they supported it and actually punished those who chose to abstain.
The walkout was little more than young people conforming to government authority by parroting the government-approved message in a government-approved venue—even at the government-approved time.
The message was simple: we want this government to take our rights away.
Young Americans across the country marched to demand less freedom from their rulers and the mainstream media, celebrities, and politicians alike shoved this down our throats as some grassroots heroic political activism.
However, it was the opposite, and now even the cheerleaders of this movement, David Hogg, Emma González, et al., are beginning to realize what happens when you beg the State to take away your rights.
They take away your rights.
On Friday, the Broward County School system announced its plan to violate the students’ right to privacy be implementing a clear backpack policy.
“Clear backpacks are the only backpacks that will be permitted on campus,” said Broward County School Superintendent Robert Runcie said in a letter sent to parents.
Now, all students will have to allow anyone at anytime to view the contents of their backpacks as well as wear IDs so they can be properly identified by school authorities.
–’[Gonzales] went on television incessantly begging the government to trample our rights.
–The government responded by requiring her to use a transparent backpack and an ID card.’
These new measures now have the darling activists on the defensive.
“I’m not happy with it. Why are you punishing me for one person’s actions?” Tyra Hemans, 19, a Stoneman senior, told CNN on Friday. But this is exactly what they wanted.
These students wanted to punish the tens of millions of law-abiding gun owners by demanding the government take away their right to defend themselves—all for the actions of one person.
Now, they are getting a taste of their own medicine, and it stinks.
“It’s unnecessary, it’s embarrassing for a lot of the students and it makes them feel isolated and separated from the rest of American school culture where they’re having essentially their First Amendment rights infringed upon because they can’t freely wear whatever backpack they want regardless of what it is,” Hogg said.
Trampling the 2nd Amendment is just fine to David Hogg, but touch the First, which is upheld by the Second, and you are a tyrant.
Well, golly-gee, shucks, Hogg, you doe-eyed pinhead. Who knew?
Dear Jay K and Ted Gorsline,
This is how Peterson trips over his own self-identified alpha-maleness and assumed brilliance. He’s thinking in demographic percentages, and it’s quoting percentages that make for lying, waffling, and misleading statistics.
He doesn’t do the math and avoids using actual number figures for his claims. There’s a difference between demographic percentages and absolute numbers. Citing statistical percentages only leaves the path open for manipulation.
For example, the ADL or the SPLC start screaming the sky is falling, and throwing out percentages like “Antisemitic hate crimes are up 50% from last year.”
In 2016, say there were 800 antisemitic hate crimes reported in FBI stats; in 2017, there were 1200 antisemtic hate crimes for a “shocking” increase of 50%, if memory serves me, but this is simply for illustration.
First off, it doesn’t prove a trend. It takes a span of several years to project that.
And, in real life, it so happened that this “shocking” increase this year was due to the ONE Israeli Jew making bomb threats and harassing phone calls to yeshivas, synagogues, and community centers all over the world, especially the US. The FBI finally caught up to him.
Now, is that really “anti-Semitic” when another Jew does it?
ADL and SPLC, without blinking an eye, said yes it drove up anti-semitic hate crimes, even though this kind of incident would be an outlier to the norm for forcasting future trends.
Disregarding the mischievous Jew-fool in Israel and his incident count, there’s been no significant increase in so-called “anti-Semitic” hate incidents from one year to the next. And, 800 anti-semitic hate crimes is statistically insignificant percentage wise in terms of 325 million people living in the US.
It’s even statistically insignificant percentage wise of just the Jewish population itself - conventionally about 2% of the US population, something like 5 or 6 million in the US.
Another reason for this hypothetical 50% increase in antisemitic hate crimes reported to the FBI is that statistical crime reporting by local law enforcement agencies is actually on a voluntary basis, and only about 70-85% of law enforcement agencies may actually report to the national criminal data base.
So, a statistical jump may not necessarily be due to an increase of actual antisemitic incidents perpetrated in the real world, but that more agencies actually reported their data to the FBI.
Percentage wise, it’s generally accepted theory that American Jews have among the highest tested IQs within their own demographic, with means being usually reported in the 110–115 range.
However, their Israeli brethren have much lower IQs, averaging somewhere around 94 IQ, not counting the seperate ethnic Arab Israelis. On the other hand, Ashkenazi Israelis tend to score higher than Sephardi, Mizrahi, or Yemeni Jews, but Israel is a racist society, and the Ashkenazi are the wealthiest, while it seems the darker the Jewish skin color, the poorer class they are).
If you give a standard IQ test of some sort to an Israeli settler, since they never study anything but Babylonian ‘Toyrah’ as +BN says, they will probably score the IQ range of a barely functioning head of cabbage.
However, as said before, Jews are usually estimated to be about 2% of the US population — 5 or 6 million people.
The white American average IQ is usually considered to be around 100. The United States Census Bureau now defines white people as those “having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.”
It includes people who reported “White” or wrote in entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish.”
And “Jewish” as another ethnic white category, changed from “Race” thanks to Jew pressure on the US Census Bureau back in the 1950s I believe it was, when it was more convenient not to be considered a separate race to take advantage of white European immigration preferences at that time.
Now in Israel, the big debate is whether Ashkenazi Gal Gadol of the Jewified Wonder Woman remake should be considered a “white” Jewess or not.
Since Jews are now increasingly on an anti-white kick, and the Ashkenazis are appropriating Palestinian culture and cuisine and calling it their own, it’s now not kosher to self-identify as white, because its now in Jewish interests to be “people of color”.
The Times of Israel argues that even Ashkenazi Jews with their admixture of Middle East and European genetics, are “people of color”.
The whole purpose is to to duck out of the “white privilege” mess that rich white Communist revolutionary Chicago Jews and fellow traveler Chicago heir Bill Ayers cooked up back in their radical bad old days of the Weather Underground that terrorized the US in the 1970s.
Shapeshifting chameleon Jews reinventing themselves all of the time. They’re “white” until its inconvenient to be “white”.
Anyway, Whites, as the Census Bureau defines it constitute the majority of the U.S. population, with a total of about 245,532,000 or 77.7% of the population as of 2013.
Non-Hispanic whites make up 62.6% of the country’s population.
Despite major changes due to immigration since the 1960s, and the higher birth-rates of nonwhites, the overall current majority of American citizens are still Euro-white, and English-speaking, though regional differences exist.
But, back to IQ, the continental English and German IQ’s also pan out at a median of 100, so the fact that the US Census Bureau categorizes Arabs and North Africans as white, and that they are a small percentage of whites, doesn’t skew the Euro-American white average at all.
Ancient Libyans were in fact depicted as white-skinned in Egyptian monumental stereotype art; their Berber descendents were also white to medium olive complexion; and much of North Africa (Barbary or Barbarian Coast) came under the dominion of the invading Germanic Viking-Vandal kings in the early 5th century until Emperor Justinian recovered it in the mid-6th century, and intermarried with the Berber and other indigenous tribes.
These people do come from a genetic history of centuries of mixed North European and North African/Berber or North European/Arab ancestry dating back to the Germanic invasions with the Vandals conquering Roman North African coast, and again the Frankish-Germanic Crusader conquests and two centuries of settlement in the Crusader Kingdoms in the Levant.
As for immigrants from North Africa and the East Mediterranean to the US, many did and do arrive as well educated, came here for college and university as foreign students and decided to stay.
Foreign student entry into colleges and universities starts out very competitive at home, particularly if government funded. Qaddafi, who offered free university education for qualified students, also sent quite a few abroad on the government’s tab because the universities at home may not have the specialties they wanted.
The earliest Middle Eastern immigrants into the US and Europe from the 19th century waves were most often Arab Christian, educated in European, English and American Christian schools, were generally working to middle class, and they were smart.
Another major migration wave Eastern Christians was before and during the Israeli-Arab wars of the 1930s and 1940s,working to middle class and educated Levantine Christian refugees, such as the parents of Helen Thomas — a Lebanese Christian, and numerous Palestinian Christians as well.
Many of them settled in the Mid-West, Anglicized their Christian names, and sought to blended in with the rest of White America. As +BN has said on occasion, there was generally a “white Christian consensus”.
Here’s where brainiac Jordan Peterson gets an F on his report card.
Here in America, if 62% of the population are non-Hispanic whites, that means there are approximately 201,500,000 non-Hispanic whites, compared to 5 or 6 million Jews.
And that means in absolute numbers, on a scale of magnitude, there way more whites with IQ’s over 110 than there are Jews who do. Someone could probably calculate it all out, but my guesstimate is that there are probably 10% of white Americans who have IQ’s 110 and above — some 20 million or more.
I fully agree with your observations, that Peterson is running psychological scam going on targeting white men. He’s ultimately either running his own gameout of lucrative self-interest, or else is a shill or useful idiot for Jewish agit-prop.
A lot of things Peterson brings up about radical feminism and pseudo-gender ideology “as a rebellion against the structure of reality,” the progressive neo-Marxist agendas and erosion of personality, society and culture, the corruption of education and academia, programmed victimhood, etc, I agree with. He’s also very secular in his orientation, and careless when it comes to the name of God and Jesus Christ.
His “alpha-male” schtick is contradictory and highly suspect, especially in this simplistic “Jews are smarter than whites” (except for Jordan Peterson). Extolling the virtues of male aggressiveness conquering their place in the hierarchy, while at the same time passively-aggressively putting white males down as dumb beasts who should bow to the superior Jew brainiacs is confused and confusing.
Shocked, I tell you! Shocked!
Detailed report on the long-standing relationship between Pentagon and Ministry of Defense Porton Down secret research facility, including secret chemical gas testing on British passengers riding the London Underground.
Won’t see this in the Jewmedia.
South Front: SALISBURY NERVE AGENT ATTACK REVEALS MILLION PENTAGON PROGRAM AT PORTON DOWN
The Pentagon has spent at least million on military experiments involving tests with deadly viruses and chemical agents at Porton Down – the UK military laboratory near the city of Salisbury.
The secretive biological and chemical research facility is located just 13 km from where on 4th March former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found slumped on a bench following an alleged Novichok nerve agent poisoning.
Information obtained from the US federal contracts registry reveals that the Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) has funded a number of military projects performed at the UK Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL), or Porton Down, over the last decade.
DTRA has also been granted full access to DSTL scientific and technical capabilities, and test data under a 2011 contract for the collaboration and exchange of scientific and technical capabilities with the UK Ministry of Defence.
According to information obtained from the US Federal contracts registry, Porton Down scientists 5 months ago completed a $ 2 million military program involving chemical gas experiments on animals.
This program was funded by the US Department of the Army on behalf of the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense (USAMRICD) and was launched in 2008 and further extended in 2012. The work on the program included Phosgene Gas tests.
Amongst them – Continued Model Development to Establish Reproducible Phosgene Injury at 24 Hours.
According to the program documents, the purpose was to monitor the development of acute lung injury following phosgene exposure. Phosgene gas was used extensively as a chemical weapon, most notably during World War I.
Coincidence: Guinea pigs at Porton Down and at the home of the poisoned ex-spy
Tests using nerve agents VX and VM on guinea pigs were carried out at Porton Down in 2015.
The project was funded by the UK Ministry of Defence. Interestingly, guinea pigs were also found at Sergei Skripal’s home in Salisbury, just a few kilometers away from the secretive chemical and biological military lab.
A photo of the Skripals’ pets – a cat and guinea pigs, was posted by his daughter Yulia on Facebook.
Sputnik: Russian MoD Says A234 Nerve Agent Allegedly Used Against Skripal Developed in US
The United States was developing the gas A-234, we have a document that confirms this, said the head of the laboratory for chemical and analytical control of the scientific center of the Russian Defense Ministry Igor Rybalchenko.
“The fact is that back in 1998 when we looked through another version of the spectral library, which was published by the National Bureau of Standards of the United States (NBS), we found a substance there that we found interesting since it was an organophosphorus substance.
“And we realized that it must have a strong lethal effect. Now it turns out that, judging by the name of this substance, it was just the same nerve agent, A-234,” Igor Rybalchenko said.
According to the scientist, this substance was added to the US database by a member of the US Army Armament Research and Development Center.
“The most interesting detail in this story is in the following versions of the database, which usually only expand, they are constantly replenished, more and more substances, we did not find this record. And I can’t explain where is it now,” the Russian military chemist said.
He also suggested that it was a heavy and volatile substance, judging by its molecular formula and its molecular weight.
“I affirm that it exactly corresponds to the formula published by Mirzayanov (Vil Mirzayanov, a Soviet chemist who moved to the USA and the author of the book on the A-234 gas).
“The chemical name of this substance is A-234 and was named “Novichok” by Boris Johnson, as a substance available in the Porton Down laboratory,” Rybalchenko said.
Light pink dress makeup 2018
Dark purple nike swoosh 2018
Adidas shoes red and black basketball 2018
Gold rope chain rapper 2018
Music notes facebook covers photo
Tile bath and shower ideas 2018
Interior home decoration 2018
Medium brown auburn hair 2018