Zoeken in deze blog 🔎🔎

donderdag 31 december 2015

MH 17 Mystery 96

De Telegraaf meldde midden deze maand, een feit dat op internet al vele maanden bekend is. Waarom hebben de massamedia in Nederland tot nu toe dit feit verzwegen? En waarom wordt nu ineens dat collectieve stilzwijgen verbroken?

di 15 dec 2015, 07:19
|
lees voor

Problemen met bewijzen MH17

Jolande van der Graaf
AMSTERDAM - 
De betrouwbaarheid van bewijsmateriaal in het MH17-onderzoek is in het geding door de duistere rol van de Oekraïense geheime dienst SBU bij corruptie en misdaadschandalen.
    Het in juni ontslagen SBU-hoofd Valentyn Nalyvaichenko wordt genoemd in de Hoornse schilderijenroof. Het in juni ontslagen SBU-hoofd Valentyn Nalyvaichenko wordt genoemd in de Hoornse schilderijenroof. Foto: AP
    Strafrechtdeskundigen voorspellen problemen voor het toekomstige strafproces tegen de massamoordenaars van de MH17-passagiers, nu blijkt dat er met de inlichtingendienst die allerlei bewijsmateriaal leverde van alles loos is. Het CDA gaat daar vandaag Kamervragen over stellen.
    „Er is veel ruis en dat speelt straks gegarandeerd mee bij de strafzaak”, zegt hoogleraar strafrecht Theo de Roos. „Dat geldt voor de verdediging, maar ook voor de rechters die uitermate kritisch naar bewijzen zullen kijken. Het Openbaar Ministerie dient daar niet op te wachten, maar nu al extra onderzoek te verrichten naar de integriteit van de bewijzen.”
    De SBU leverde de afgeluisterde telefoongesprekken tussen pro-Russische rebellen in het oorlogsgebied, vlak voor en nadat de Malaysia Airlines Boeing uit de lucht werd geschoten. De veiligheidsdienst had verder een dikke vinger in de pap bij het veiligstellen van stoffelijke overschotten, wrakstukken en raketdelen in het rampgebied.
    Maar dezelfde SBU duikt ook op in tal van misdaadaffaires. Meerdere informanten in het schandaal van de weg geroofde schilderijen uit het Westfries Museum in Hoorn wijzen het in juni ontslagen SBU-hoofd Valentyn Nalyvaichenko aan als brein achter de roofkunsthandel. De naam van de vroegere SBU-chef werd vorig jaar al in verband gebracht met grootschalige door de Finse politie ontdekte antieksmokkel.
    Ook in het onderzoek tegen de Limburgse politiemol Mark M. lopen er lijnen naar de SBU. Justitie Oost-Brabant deed onlangs rechtshulpverzoek aan Kiev. Volgens opsporingsbronnen hield M. zich in Oekraïne op in een netwerk van ’gangsters en leden van de geheime dienst.’ Alleen deze zomer verdwenen in Oekraïne al 22 SBU-spionnen achter de tralies vanwege corruptie en criminele praktijken.

    Groot risico

    Het CDA noemt de SBU-schandalen een groot risico voor het strafrechtelijk onderzoek in de MH17-zaak en wil tekst en uitleg van verantwoordelijk minister Van der Steur.
    „Er is al weinig bewijsmateriaal”, zegt Tweede Kamerlid Omtzigt. „Wat er wel is, is licht tot zwaar gecompromitteerd. Het bewijsmateriaal werd veel te laat in het gebied opgehaald en blijkt ook nog verzameld door lieden die niet deugen.”
    Het CDA wil weten waarom satelliet- en radargegevens van Oekraïners, Russen en Amerikanen in het onderzoek ontbreken. „Verder blijkt nog steeds niet te zijn gepraat met de Oekraïense luchtverkeersleiding.” Volgens het OM verloopt de samenwerking met de Oekraïense onderzoekers ’goed’ en wordt al het aangeleverde bewijs ’kritisch getoetst’.
    Hoogleraar internationaal strafrecht Geert-Jan Knoops vindt echter ook dat meer onderzoek naar de betrouwbaarheid nodig is. „Het OM heeft de plicht elk scenario dat met bewijsmateriaal is geknoeid uit te sluiten. Dat houdt in dat nu al nauwgezet bekeken moet worden hoe de SBU bijvoorbeeld de afgeluisterde telefoongesprekken heeft geselecteerd en wie er bij die selectie van de taps betrokken waren.”


    Obama's Neoconservatism

    Putin Fights the War Party on All Fronts

    The Obama administration still sticks to the Cold War 2.0 script on Russia.
    By Pepe Escobar

    December 30, 2015 "Information Clearing House" - "teleSUR" - Let’s talk about “Russian aggression.”
    The fight to the death in Moscow’s inner circles is really between the Eurasianists and the so-called Atlantic integrationists, a.k.a. the Western fifth column. The crux of the battle is arguably the Russian Central Bank and the Finance Ministry – where some key liberalcon monetarist players are remote-controlled by the usual suspects, the Masters of the Universe. 
    The same mechanism applies, geopolitically, to any side, in any latitude, which has linked its own fiat money to Western central banks. The Masters of the Universe always seek to exercise hegemony by manipulating usury and fiat money control. 
    So why President Putin does not fire the head of the Russian Central Bank, Elvira Nabiulina, and a great deal of his financial team - as they keep buying U.S. bonds and propping up the U.S. dollar instead of the ruble? What’s really being aggressed here if not Russian interests?    
    That Stab in the Back
    It’s clear by now which party profited from the downing of the Russian Su-24 by the Turkish Air Force – a graphic act of war. The immediate result was the suspension – which could lead to the cancelling – of a crucial Pipelineistan plank: Turkish Stream, which is a bête noire for the Masters of the Universe as Turkey was about to become the key alternative bypassing failed state Ukraine for supplying natural gas to southern Europe.   
    On top if it the EU paid Ankara 3 billion euros for its “indirect” services (the official excuse is to allow Turkey to control Syrian immigration to the EU.) And EU sanctions to Russia were extended for another six months.    
    A fitting Russian response would be Moscow defaulting on all debt to Western banks in retaliation for the sanctions. An extreme step would be blocking natural gas shipments to the EU. If Russia even floated one of these moves, not to mention both, sanctions would be lifted in a flash. So who’s really being “aggressed” here? 
    Putin – and Russian intel – didn't see it coming: Sultan Erdogan’s “stab in the back.” So a case can be made that Russian intel seriously underestimated Erdogan’s massive investment on regime change in Syria.
    Whatever happens on the ground – much more than in the Vienna-Geneva charade now passing for a “peace process” – the future of Syria bears two stark options; a neo-Ottoman colony, but essentially subordinated to the whims of the Masters of the Universe; or a unitary sovereign nation, not partitioned, with a strong relationship to both Russia and Iran.   
    The question, though, remains; how does Turkey get away with such a provocation, with Russia imposing just a few sanctions? 
    That Fuzzy Agenda 
    The missing link in the puzzle is Israel. Contradictions became glaringly obvious with the flattening of a building in Jaramana, in Damascus, by Israeli missiles, killing nine civilians as well as Hezbollah-linked Samir Kuntar.
    This could not have happened, in any way, without Russian acquiescence – considering Russian missile defense now protects Syrian territory. So the message is clear; Russia won’t interfere with Israel’s priorities in Syria/Lebanon – and vice-versa. 
    “Vice-versa” couldn’t be trickier. Tel Aviv tacitly “supports” the Nusra Front, a.k.a. al-Qaida in Syria, which even the Obama administration finally has been forced to admit is a terrorist outfit.
    According to the Russian Defense Ministry – as well as independent Turkish investigations - most of the stolen Syrian/Iraqi oil Islamic State group scam ends up with the oil being bought by Israel. Tel Aviv happens to be the top buyer of the stolen-from-Baghdad Iraqi Kurdistan oil with which stolen Daesh oil is mixed.   
    And to top it off, Tel Aviv is a mortal enemy of both Iran and Hezbollah – which are essential nodes of the “4+1” coalition (Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq, plus Hezbollah) fighting the Islamic State group. Not to mention that Tel Aviv – which favors a partitioned Syria - wants to gobble up the energy-rich Golan Heights for perpetuity.   
    So how does Israel get away with it? 
    That War Party “Offer” 
    The bottom line of these three scenarios – the Russian economy, Turkey and Israel – is that a lethal, devastating response is an easily available option for Putin on all three. Yet he refuses to be trapped by a war logic. Putin is the ultimate adversary of “Russian aggression.” 
    A full confrontation with Turkey will unite a disunited NATO. Now Russian intel has connected the dots on how the Masters of the Universe are trying to use Ankara as bait to trap Moscow, as they extensively used a now discarded, irrelevant Kiev. Turkey’s top three import nations happen to be Russia (10.4 percent), China (10.3 percent) and Germany (9.2 percent); deep trouble in Turkey would be a major headache for the trio, much to the delight of the Empire of Chaos.    
    A confrontation with Israel will obviously bring about the full force of the Masters of the Universe. Not to mention that the last thing Moscow needs is to open a new front in the Levant. Here is a meticulous attempt by The Saker to clarify the dangerous liaisons between Israel and Russia. 
    The key front though is the Russian economy; sooner or later there’s got to be a purge of the Russian Central Bank and the Finance Ministry, but Putin will only act when he has surefire internal support, and that’s far from given.       
    The lame duck Obama administration – whatever rhetorical and/or legalistic contortions – still sticks to the Cold War 2.0 script on Russia, duly prescribed by Obama mentor Dr. Zbigniew “Grand Chessboard” Brzezinski. 
    That follows a “tradition” Bill Blum, for instance, has extensively documented, as since the end of WWII Washington attempted to overthrow more than 50 governments – the absolute majority full democracies; dropped bombs on the civilian population of over 30 nations; attempted to assassinate over 50 foreign leaders; attempted to suppress nationalist movements in 20 nations; interfered on countless democratic elections; taught torture through manuals and “advisers”; and the list goes on. 
    Putin and the best and the brightest of Russian intel very well know it. 
    And yet they do maintain a decent margin of maneuver; establishing Russia as an indispensable power all across Southwest Asia (after smashing the fake “Caliphate” from Raqqa to Mosul); preventing any Masters of the Universe encroachment on the Black Sea; and putting up a real fight in the near future in the Balkans. 
    The real advances will keep coming as spin-offs of the Russia-China diplomatic/strategic partnership – from energy to trade to the military sphere. And that projects us once again towards the New Silk Roads – and the convergence of the China-driven One Belt, One Road with the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU).   
    The bottom line is that in 2016 the option will continue to be stark; it’s either the hegemony of the War Party – with the subtext of a Washington “willfully” condoned Salafi-jihadi “offer” to young, disaffected Muslims; or the vision of a full, prosperous trade/commerce/communication network for the whole of Eurasia. Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets.  

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article43830.htm 


    Pepe Escobar is an independent geopolitical analyst. He writes for RT, Sputnik and TomDispatch, and is a frequent contributor to websites and radio and TV shows ranging from the U.S. to East Asia. He is the former roving correspondent for Asia Times Online, where he wrote the column The Roving Eye from 2000 to 2014. Born in Brazil, he's been a foreign correspondent since 1985, and has lived in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Washington, Bangkok and Hong Kong. Even before 9/11 he specialized in covering the arc from the Middle East to Central and East Asia, with an emphasis on Big Power geopolitics and energy wars. He is the author of "Globalistan" (2007), "Red Zone Blues" (2007), "Obama does Globalistan" (2009) and "Empire of Chaos" (2014), all published by Nimble Books. His latest book is "2030", also by Nimble Books, out in December 2015. He currently lives between Paris and Bangkok. Follow him on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pepe.escobar.77377The Obama administration still sticks to the Cold War 2.0 script on Russia.
    Let’s talk about “Russian aggression.”
    
    The fight to the death in Moscow’s inner circles is really between the Eurasianists and the so-called Atlantic integrationists, a.k.a. the Western fifth column. The crux of the battle is arguably the Russian Central Bank and the Finance Ministry – where some key liberalcon monetarist players are remote-controlled by the usual suspects, the Masters of the Universe.
    
    The same mechanism applies, geopolitically, to any side, in any latitude, which has linked its own fiat money to Western central banks. The Masters of the Universe always seek to exercise hegemony by manipulating usury and fiat money control.
    
    So why President Putin does not fire the head of the Russian Central Bank, Elvira Nabiulina, and a great deal of his financial team - as they keep buying U.S. bonds and propping up the U.S. dollar instead of the ruble? What’s really being aggressed here if not Russian interests?   
    
    That Stab in the Back
    
    
    It’s clear by now which party profited from the downing of the Russian Su-24 by the Turkish Air Force – a graphic act of war. The immediate result was the suspension – which could lead to the cancelling – of a crucial Pipelineistan plank: Turkish Stream, which is a bête noire for the Masters of the Universe as Turkey was about to become the key alternative bypassing failed state Ukraine for supplying natural gas to southern Europe.  
    
    On top if it the EU paid Ankara 3 billion euros for its “indirect” services (the official excuse is to allow Turkey to control Syrian immigration to the EU.) And EU sanctions to Russia were extended for another six months.   
    
    A fitting Russian response would be Moscow defaulting on all debt to Western banks in retaliation for the sanctions. An extreme step would be blocking natural gas shipments to the EU. If Russia even floated one of these moves, not to mention both, sanctions would be lifted in a flash. So who’s really being “aggressed” here?
    
    Putin – and Russian intel – didn't see it coming: Sultan Erdogan’s “stab in the back.” So a case can be made that Russian intel seriously underestimated Erdogan’s massive investment on regime change in Syria.
    
    Whatever happens on the ground – much more than in the Vienna-Geneva charade now passing for a “peace process” – the future of Syria bears two stark options; a neo-Ottoman colony, but essentially subordinated to the whims of the Masters of the Universe; or a unitary sovereign nation, not partitioned, with a strong relationship to both Russia and Iran.   
    
    The question, though, remains; how does Turkey get away with such a provocation, with Russia imposing just a few sanctions?
    
    That Fuzzy Agenda
    
    The missing link in the puzzle is Israel. Contradictions became glaringly obvious with the flattening of a building in Jaramana, in Damascus, by Israeli missiles, killing nine civilians as well as Hezbollah-linked Samir Kuntar.
    
    This could not have happened, in any way, without Russian acquiescence – considering Russian missile defense now protects Syrian territory. So the message is clear; Russia won’t interfere with Israel’s priorities in Syria/Lebanon – and vice-versa.
    
    
    “Vice-versa” couldn’t be trickier. Tel Aviv tacitly “supports” the Nusra Front, a.k.a. al-Qaida in Syria, which even the Obama administration finally has been forced to admit is a terrorist outfit.
    
    According to the Russian Defense Ministry – as well as independent Turkish investigations - most of the stolen Syrian/Iraqi oil Islamic State group scam ends up with the oil being bought by Israel. Tel Aviv happens to be the top buyer of the stolen-from-Baghdad Iraqi Kurdistan oil with which stolen Daesh oil is mixed.  
    
    And to top it off, Tel Aviv is a mortal enemy of both Iran and Hezbollah – which are essential nodes of the “4+1” coalition (Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq, plus Hezbollah) fighting the Islamic State group. Not to mention that Tel Aviv – which favors a partitioned Syria - wants to gobble up the energy-rich Golan Heights for perpetuity.  
    
    So how does Israel get away with it?
    
    That War Party “Offer”
    
    The bottom line of these three scenarios – the Russian economy, Turkey and Israel – is that a lethal, devastating response is an easily available option for Putin on all three. Yet he refuses to be trapped by a war logic. Putin is the ultimate adversary of “Russian aggression.”
    
    A full confrontation with Turkey will unite a disunited NATO. Now Russian intel has connected the dots on how the Masters of the Universe are trying to use Ankara as bait to trap Moscow, as they extensively used a now discarded, irrelevant Kiev. Turkey’s top three import nations happen to be Russia (10.4 percent), China (10.3 percent) and Germany (9.2 percent); deep trouble in Turkey would be a major headache for the trio, much to the delight of the Empire of Chaos.   
    
    A confrontation with Israel will obviously bring about the full force of the Masters of the Universe. Not to mention that the last thing Moscow needs is to open a new front in the Levant. Here is a meticulous attempt by The Saker to clarify the dangerous liaisons between Israel and Russia.
    
    The key front though is the Russian economy; sooner or later there’s got to be a purge of the Russian Central Bank and the Finance Ministry, but Putin will only act when he has surefire internal support, and that’s far from given.      
    
    The lame duck Obama administration – whatever rhetorical and/or legalistic contortions – still sticks to the Cold War 2.0 script on Russia, duly prescribed by Obama mentor Dr. Zbigniew “Grand Chessboard” Brzezinski.
    
    That follows a “tradition” Bill Blum, for instance, has extensively documented, as since the end of WWII Washington attempted to overthrow more than 50 governments – the absolute majority full democracies; dropped bombs on the civilian population of over 30 nations; attempted to assassinate over 50 foreign leaders; attempted to suppress nationalist movements in 20 nations; interfered on countless democratic elections; taught torture through manuals and “advisers”; and the list goes on.
    
    Putin and the best and the brightest of Russian intel very well know it.
    
    And yet they do maintain a decent margin of maneuver; establishing Russia as an indispensable power all across Southwest Asia (after smashing the fake “Caliphate” from Raqqa to Mosul); preventing any Masters of the Universe encroachment on the Black Sea; and putting up a real fight in the near future in the Balkans.
    
    The real advances will keep coming as spin-offs of the Russia-China diplomatic/strategic partnership – from energy to trade to the military sphere. And that projects us once again towards the New Silk Roads – and the convergence of the China-driven One Belt, One Road with the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU).  
    
    The bottom line is that in 2016 the option will continue to be stark; it’s either the hegemony of the War Party – with the subtext of a Washington “willfully” condoned Salafi-jihadi “offer” to young, disaffected Muslims; or the vision of a full, prosperous trade/commerce/communication network for the whole of Eurasia. Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets.  
    
    Pepe Escobar is an independent geopolitical analyst. He writes for RT, Sputnik and TomDispatch, and is a frequent contributor to websites and radio and TV shows ranging from the U.S. to East Asia. He is the former roving correspondent for Asia Times Online, where he wrote the column The Roving Eye from 2000 to 2014. Born in Brazil, he's been a foreign correspondent since 1985, and has lived in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Washington, Bangkok and Hong Kong. Even before 9/11 he specialized in covering the arc from the Middle East to Central and East Asia, with an emphasis on Big Power geopolitics and energy wars. He is the author of "Globalistan" (2007), "Red Zone Blues" (2007), "Obama does Globalistan" (2009) and "Empire of Chaos" (2014), all published by Nimble Books. His latest book is "2030", also by Nimble Books, out in December 2015. He currently lives between Paris and Bangkok. Follow him on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pepe.escobar.77377
    
    This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address: 
     "http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/Vladimir-Putin-Fights-the-War-Party-on-All-Fronts--20151229-0004.html". If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/englishThe Obama administration still sticks to the Cold War 2.0 script on Russia.
    Let’s talk about “Russian aggression.”
    
    The fight to the death in Moscow’s inner circles is really between the Eurasianists and the so-called Atlantic integrationists, a.k.a. the Western fifth column. The crux of the battle is arguably the Russian Central Bank and the Finance Ministry – where some key liberalcon monetarist players are remote-controlled by the usual suspects, the Masters of the Universe.
    
    The same mechanism applies, geopolitically, to any side, in any latitude, which has linked its own fiat money to Western central banks. The Masters of the Universe always seek to exercise hegemony by manipulating usury and fiat money control.
    
    So why President Putin does not fire the head of the Russian Central Bank, Elvira Nabiulina, and a great deal of his financial team - as they keep buying U.S. bonds and propping up the U.S. dollar instead of the ruble? What’s really being aggressed here if not Russian interests?   
    
    That Stab in the Back
    
    
    It’s clear by now which party profited from the downing of the Russian Su-24 by the Turkish Air Force – a graphic act of war. The immediate result was the suspension – which could lead to the cancelling – of a crucial Pipelineistan plank: Turkish Stream, which is a bête noire for the Masters of the Universe as Turkey was about to become the key alternative bypassing failed state Ukraine for supplying natural gas to southern Europe.  
    
    On top if it the EU paid Ankara 3 billion euros for its “indirect” services (the official excuse is to allow Turkey to control Syrian immigration to the EU.) And EU sanctions to Russia were extended for another six months.   
    
    A fitting Russian response would be Moscow defaulting on all debt to Western banks in retaliation for the sanctions. An extreme step would be blocking natural gas shipments to the EU. If Russia even floated one of these moves, not to mention both, sanctions would be lifted in a flash. So who’s really being “aggressed” here?
    
    Putin – and Russian intel – didn't see it coming: Sultan Erdogan’s “stab in the back.” So a case can be made that Russian intel seriously underestimated Erdogan’s massive investment on regime change in Syria.
    
    Whatever happens on the ground – much more than in the Vienna-Geneva charade now passing for a “peace process” – the future of Syria bears two stark options; a neo-Ottoman colony, but essentially subordinated to the whims of the Masters of the Universe; or a unitary sovereign nation, not partitioned, with a strong relationship to both Russia and Iran.   
    
    The question, though, remains; how does Turkey get away with such a provocation, with Russia imposing just a few sanctions?
    
    That Fuzzy Agenda
    
    The missing link in the puzzle is Israel. Contradictions became glaringly obvious with the flattening of a building in Jaramana, in Damascus, by Israeli missiles, killing nine civilians as well as Hezbollah-linked Samir Kuntar.
    
    This could not have happened, in any way, without Russian acquiescence – considering Russian missile defense now protects Syrian territory. So the message is clear; Russia won’t interfere with Israel’s priorities in Syria/Lebanon – and vice-versa.
    
    
    “Vice-versa” couldn’t be trickier. Tel Aviv tacitly “supports” the Nusra Front, a.k.a. al-Qaida in Syria, which even the Obama administration finally has been forced to admit is a terrorist outfit.
    
    According to the Russian Defense Ministry – as well as independent Turkish investigations - most of the stolen Syrian/Iraqi oil Islamic State group scam ends up with the oil being bought by Israel. Tel Aviv happens to be the top buyer of the stolen-from-Baghdad Iraqi Kurdistan oil with which stolen Daesh oil is mixed.  
    
    And to top it off, Tel Aviv is a mortal enemy of both Iran and Hezbollah – which are essential nodes of the “4+1” coalition (Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq, plus Hezbollah) fighting the Islamic State group. Not to mention that Tel Aviv – which favors a partitioned Syria - wants to gobble up the energy-rich Golan Heights for perpetuity.  
    
    So how does Israel get away with it?
    
    That War Party “Offer”
    
    The bottom line of these three scenarios – the Russian economy, Turkey and Israel – is that a lethal, devastating response is an easily available option for Putin on all three. Yet he refuses to be trapped by a war logic. Putin is the ultimate adversary of “Russian aggression.”
    
    A full confrontation with Turkey will unite a disunited NATO. Now Russian intel has connected the dots on how the Masters of the Universe are trying to use Ankara as bait to trap Moscow, as they extensively used a now discarded, irrelevant Kiev. Turkey’s top three import nations happen to be Russia (10.4 percent), China (10.3 percent) and Germany (9.2 percent); deep trouble in Turkey would be a major headache for the trio, much to the delight of the Empire of Chaos.   
    
    A confrontation with Israel will obviously bring about the full force of the Masters of the Universe. Not to mention that the last thing Moscow needs is to open a new front in the Levant. Here is a meticulous attempt by The Saker to clarify the dangerous liaisons between Israel and Russia.
    
    The key front though is the Russian economy; sooner or later there’s got to be a purge of the Russian Central Bank and the Finance Ministry, but Putin will only act when he has surefire internal support, and that’s far from given.      
    
    The lame duck Obama administration – whatever rhetorical and/or legalistic contortions – still sticks to the Cold War 2.0 script on Russia, duly prescribed by Obama mentor Dr. Zbigniew “Grand Chessboard” Brzezinski.
    
    That follows a “tradition” Bill Blum, for instance, has extensively documented, as since the end of WWII Washington attempted to overthrow more than 50 governments – the absolute majority full democracies; dropped bombs on the civilian population of over 30 nations; attempted to assassinate over 50 foreign leaders; attempted to suppress nationalist movements in 20 nations; interfered on countless democratic elections; taught torture through manuals and “advisers”; and the list goes on.
    
    Putin and the best and the brightest of Russian intel very well know it.
    
    And yet they do maintain a decent margin of maneuver; establishing Russia as an indispensable power all across Southwest Asia (after smashing the fake “Caliphate” from Raqqa to Mosul); preventing any Masters of the Universe encroachment on the Black Sea; and putting up a real fight in the near future in the Balkans.
    
    The real advances will keep coming as spin-offs of the Russia-China diplomatic/strategic partnership – from energy to trade to the military sphere. And that projects us once again towards the New Silk Roads – and the convergence of the China-driven One Belt, One Road with the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU).  
    
    The bottom line is that in 2016 the option will continue to be stark; it’s either the hegemony of the War Party – with the subtext of a Washington “willfully” condoned Salafi-jihadi “offer” to young, disaffected Muslims; or the vision of a full, prosperous trade/commerce/communication network for the whole of Eurasia. Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets.  
    
    Pepe Escobar is an independent geopolitical analyst. He writes for RT, Sputnik and TomDispatch, and is a frequent contributor to websites and radio and TV shows ranging from the U.S. to East Asia. He is the former roving correspondent for Asia Times Online, where he wrote the column The Roving Eye from 2000 to 2014. Born in Brazil, he's been a foreign correspondent since 1985, and has lived in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Washington, Bangkok and Hong Kong. Even before 9/11 he specialized in covering the arc from the Middle East to Central and East Asia, with an emphasis on Big Power geopolitics and energy wars. He is the author of "Globalistan" (2007), "Red Zone Blues" (2007), "Obama does Globalistan" (2009) and "Empire of Chaos" (2014), all published by Nimble Books. His latest book is "2030", also by Nimble Books, out in December 2015. He currently lives between Paris and Bangkok. Follow him on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pepe.escobar.77377
    
    This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address: 
     "http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/Vladimir-Putin-Fights-the-War-Party-on-All-Fronts--20151229-0004.html". If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/english

    Crazy Hillary Clinton


    Hillary Clinton’s insane plan for a no-fly zone

    The Democratic presidential frontrunner is calling for war against Russia over Syria and hoping no one notices

    December 29, 2015 2:00AM ET
    During the Dec. 19 Democratic presidential debate in New Hampshire, moderator Martha Raddatz of ABC News generally steered the candidates toward hawkish positions on foreign policy. She appeared to accept the premise that the war against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also called ISIS) is both necessary and urgent. But one position advanced by former Secretary of State and current frontrunner Hillary Clinton was so hawkish, so cavalier, that even Raddatz felt compelled to push back. After Clinton said she supported a no-fly zone in Syria in the context of fighting ISIL, Raddatz skeptically followed up:
    RADDATZ: Secretary Clinton, I’d like to go back to that if I could. ISIS doesn’t have aircraft, Al Qaida doesn’t have aircraft. So would you shoot down a Syrian military aircraft or a Russian airplane?
    CLINTON: I do not think it would come to that. We are already de-conflicting airspace. […] I am advocating the no-fly zone both because I think it would help us on the ground to protect Syrians; I’m also advocating it because I think it gives us some leverage in our conversations with Russia […] The no-fly zone, I would hope, would be also shared by Russia. If they will begin to turn their military attention away from going after the adversaries of Assad toward ISIS and put the Assad future on the political and diplomatic track, where it belongs.
    Raddatz moved on, but this exchange illustrates the absurdity of Clinton’s support for a “no-fly zone.” A no-fly zone over Syria, as all parties understand, is a tacit declaration of war not only against Syria, but also against their longtime ally Russia, whose air force is currently flying over Syria to defend the government of Bashar al-Assad against both ISIL and various rebel groups, some overtly or covertly backed by the United States.
    But most Americans don’t know what a no-fly zone is, because the media almost never explains what it would entail. Indeed, one has to look to paragraph 19 of an article in The New York Times from 2013 to get some specifics:
    Imposing a no-fly zone, [Gen. Martin E. Dempsey] said, would require as many as 70,000 American servicemen to dismantle Syria’s sophisticated antiaircraft system and then impose a 24-hour watch over the country.
    That was written before Russia entered the war in September 2015. The total number of U.S. servicemen needed to enforce a no-fly zone is likely now much higher, and the stakes for shooting down a Russian jet, intentionally or not, are much greater than for a Syrian one. Yet none of these inconvenient details are brought up in presidential debates.
    That’s why Raddatz was so confused by the idea that Russia would “share” a no-fly zone. There’s little reason to believe Russia would sell out their only ally in the Middle East, and they’re certainly not going to assist the U.S. in bombing this ally’s air defense and warplanes. The reason Clinton described a fantasy no-fly zone where Russia joins the U.S. is because a real one could potentially require the U.S. to shoot down Russian jets, and starting World War III doesn’t square with the wishes of most Democrats, let alone most Americans. Even voters who don’t follow foreign policy debates closely can see that it’s not the Syrian Army shooting up cafes and concert calls in Paris; it’s their sworn enemy, ISIL.
    Clinton’s grandstanding may focus-group well and make her look ‘tough,’ but it can only undermine efforts to bring Syria’s devastating civil war to an end.
    Even The Atlantic’s typically hawkish Jeffrey Goldberg was confused, tweeting, “Still trying to understand Hillary’s point re: no-fly zone shared with Russia, which supports Assad’s air force. Not getting it.” It’s understandable why he doesn’t get it: It makes no sense. Either Clinton is calling for an actual no-fly zone that would involve de facto war against Russia and Syria, or she’s calling for a fantasy one where Russia reverses its entire foreign policy and becomes a client state of the U.S. She’s either being wildly reckless or willfully obtuse.
    No other major Democrat supports Clinton’s tortured position. President Barack Obama himself has dismissed the idea, including when Clinton pushed for it while serving in his administration. But Clinton isn’t alone. She has lots of company on the other side of aisle, including from GOP establishment favorite Sen. Marco Rubio (with whom she shares a foreign policy consultant, Beacon Strategies), who has repeatedly called for a no-fly zone in similarly vague terms. In the Republican debates, the moderators haven’t even gone as far as Raddatz tried to in clarifying what this means.
    The term “no-fly zone” is casually thrown around in the debates unchallenged, either because the moderators themselves don’t know what exactly it means or because they assume their audience doesn’t. Either way, “no-fly zone” has become the most effective way of calling for regime change in Syria without appearing to do so. It’s a neocon dog-whistle designed to appeal to hawks without offending a war-weary public. As George Orwell wrote in “Politics and the English Language,” “such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them.”
    If Clinton and the GOP want to spark a war with Syria, and by extension Russia, they should be honest about that and what it would entail. Right now all we have is tough-on-Assad bromides and virtually no realistic assessment of how such a plan would be carried out.
    This type of bellicose language form Clinton wouldn’t be so troubling if she wasn’t both Obama’s former secretary of state and his likeliest successor. As Secretary of State John Kerry and Obama attempt to negotiate an end to the Syrian conflict, having just adopted a very tenuous framework at the U.N. Security Council, the specter of a de facto declaration of war against Russia in January 2017 is hardly helpful. Perhaps the Russians assume it’s just election-year bluster, but perhaps they don’t. Or perhaps the Iranians don’t. Or perhaps, above all, Assad does not.
    Is this a risk worth taking to score political points in an election? Clinton’s grandstanding may focus-group well and make her look “tough,” but it can only undermine efforts to bring Syria’s devastating civil war to an end. Clinton might not care that her position is unworkable and reckless. But shouldn’t the media?
    Adam Johnson is an associate editor at AlterNet and a contributor to the media watchdog Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting.



    Bankocracy

    BOEKRECENSIE

    "Bancocracy": dit financiële systeem gaat niet samen met democratie

    In zijn Engelstalig boek 'Bancocracy' vat Eric Toussaint samen waarom het huidige financiële systeem doet wat het doet, omdat het zo is ontworpen en zo bedoeld is. Zolang dit systeem blijft bestaan zullen crisissen elkaar blijven opvolgen en zal kapitaal verder geconcentreerd worden in minder handen, ten koste van de democratie. 
    woensdag 30 december 2015 

    Vindt u dit artikel de moeite? Geef ons dan uw fair share.

    Toussaint schrijft in zijn boek Bancocracy geen droge theoretische analyse maar bekijkt de dingen zoals ze zijn, zoals ze werken. Hiermee toont hij hoe de crisis in 2008 kon beginnen. Dit is het logische gevolg van meerdere beslissingen die in de jaren ervoor werden genomen: deregulering van de banksector en de dagelijkse misdaden die de banken plegen in samenspraak met regeringen en centrale overheidsbanken.
    De oplossing die Toussaint voorstelt: socialiseren, niet zomaar 'nationaliseren', van de banken en er openbare diensten van maken onder controle van de belastingbetalers. Alle openbare schulden die niet op wettelijke wijze werden aangegaan moeten worden afgeschaft. Dat lijkt zeer radicaal, maar wie vervolgens de echte werking van die banksector doorneemt, kan alleen maar met afgrijzen vaststellen dat het nog veel erger is dan hij/zij al vermoedde.
    In 36 hoofdstukken, die elk afzonderlijk kunnen worden gelezen, legt hij uit waarom de financieel-economische crisis onvermijdelijk was en zich zonder fundamentele wijzigingen zal blijven verderzetten.
    Hij begint met een historisch overzicht van het kapitalistisch systeem, waar de banksector het hart van is, vanaf de vroege jaren 1970. Daarna overloopt hij de twintig jaar die vooraf gingen aan de ineenstorting van 2008. De banken reageerden heel cynisch door redding door de overheden te eisen en te bekomen, zonder daar ook maar één toegeving tegenover te zetten, om bijvoorbeeld het eigen gedrag te veranderen dat de crisis had veroorzaakt
    Daarna volgt een lange reeks manipulaties en misdaden die de banksector ongestraft blijft plegen. Toussaint toont de impact die dat heeft op de getroffen bevolkingen. De brutale klassenstrijd die nu wordt gevoerd plaatst hij in het kader van deze manier van werken door de banken.
    Toussaint's besluit is vernietigend: democratische vooruitgang heeft niet verhinderd dat de hedendaagse maatschappijen nog even hard ondergeschikt zijn aan de wil van de leidende één procent als in de stadsrepublieken van Venetië en Genua van de 16de eeuw.
    De auteur ontkent niet dat ook grote bedrijven verantwoordelijk zijn voor wat nu gebeurt. Ook zij gebruiken hun nauwe banden met de staatsstructuren en zijn daar even geslepen in als de banken. Toussaint concentreert zich echter op die laatsten: de 'bankocratie'.
    Toussaint gebruikt geen omfloerste taal en gaat direct naar de essentie. “De openbare schuld is een permanent mechanisme geworden voor de transfer van welvaart van de bevolking naar de kapitalistische klasse.”  Dit gaat niet over rotte appels in de mand, de mand is rot.

    Too big to fail, too big to jail

    De banken zijn zo machtig geworden dat ze 'too big to fail' zijn, te groot en te sterk om zomaar failliet te laten gaan. Dan zouden ze immers alles mee in de afgrond sleuren. De banken voor hun verantwoordelijkheid plaatsen kan niet eens. Bovendien, ook de mensen achter dit systeem, de bankiers, zijn 'too big to jail'.
    De bedragen die de overheden in de banken hebben gepompt – zonder daar enige voorwaarde tegenover te stellen – zijn gigantisch. Het gaat hier over belastingsgeld, of beter gezegd over het geld van de bevolking. Dit gaat over geld dat niet meer - nooit meer - naar onderwijs, sociale zekerheid, gezondheidszorg en openbaar vervoer gaat. De banken moesten immers ten allen prijze (letterlijk) gered worden. Daar moest alles voor wijken. De Griekse bevolking kreeg die voorkeursbehandeling niet.
    Over het algemeen is het boek zeer toegankelijk geschreven. Af en toe is het echter wel erg technisch. Het is ook een enorme brok informatie. Elk van de zesendertig hoofdstukken is in feite een boek op zichzelf waard.
    Zo leer je onder meer wat termen als Quantitative Easing en Basel II betekenen. Hij toont hoe bedreven banken zijn in de kunst van de misleiding, wat de gevolgen zijn van speculatie op grondstoffen en op voedsel of hoe wisselkoersen worden gemanipuleerd voor kortetermijnwinsten. Intrestvoeten blijken immers geen exacte cijfers te zijn. De echte doelstellingen van de Europese Centrale Bank hebben zo goed als niets te maken met de officiële doelstellingen. Het Duitse model is er voor de banken en de elite alleen, enzovoort.
    Soms is het zwaar om lezen, niet dat het moeilijk is, het is gewoon heel veel, al die informatie, overweldigend.
    Dit systeem heeft echter één zwakte. Het heeft een instemmende bevolking nodig. In een democratische wereld waar deze informatie ruim verspreid zou worden zou de analyse van Toussaint's dagelijks frontpaginanieuws zijn en dat blijven tot de hele bankocratie en allen die er mee verbonden zijn, hun terechte straf hebben gekregen, tot dit door en door verdorven systeem is afgeschaft. Om die informatie weg te houden van de bevolking zijn instemmende media nodig. Die doen dat 'uitstekend'.
    Je moet het niet eens zijn met de veertien voorstellen die Toussaint als mogelijke oplossingen aanbiedt. De lezer moet echter erkennen dat deze auteur zijn onderwerp door en door kent en begrijpt. Zijn voorstellen zijn niet uit de lucht gegrepen.
    Wat nu gebeurt is een moreel abjecte operatie die de democratie van haar inhoud berooft. Deze bankocratie berooft de maatschappij systematisch van de middelen om een samenleving te behouden of op te bouwen die er voor iedereen is. Alle hard bevochten sociale rechten sinds de Tweede Wereldoorlog worden geviseerd.
    Wie het boek uit heeft kan niet anders dan diepe verontwaardiging voelen, niet alleen over de morele verdorvenheid van dit systeem, maar even goed over de passiviteit en instemming van de politieke elite en de media, die deze informatie zo goed als compleet negeren. Een geïnformeerde bevolking zou dit nooit aanvaarden.
    'Bancocracy' is de Engelse vertaling van het Franstalige 'Bancocratie' dat in 2014 verscheen. Bancocracy werd uitgebracht in juni 2015. Het boek kan gratis worden gedownload. Wie de organisatie Comité pour l'Annulation de la Dette du Tiers Monder (CADTM-Comité voor de afschaffing van de schuld van de Derde Wereld) wil steunen kan het boek ook in druk aankopen. Zie deze link voor het e-boek of voor het bestellen van het boek.


    Bankocracy 

    Éric Toussaint 

    Governments of the most industrialised countries have dramatically increased their public debt to bail out the private banks after the most disastrous economic and financial meltdown in capitalist history since the 1930s. Paying debts and reducing fiscal deficits have become the perfect pretexts to enforce austerity measures everywhere. The Troika (European Commission, ECB and IMF) and all EU governments have launched an unprecedented attack on the social and economic rights of their peoples. This book will enable the reader to understand how the crisis developed: the consequences of deregulating the banking system, the logic underpinning private banks’ responses, and the crimes they perpetrate on a daily basis with the collusion of governments and central banks. It argues for socialization, rather than ‘nationalization’, of the banking sector so that it becomes a proper public service under citizen control and monitoring. It argues for the cancellation of illegitimate public debt that largely results from bank bail-outs. It uses simple straightforward language to make it possible for anyone to understand the current crisis and see coherent alternatives to current policies. 



    Netherlands Tax Paradise for Military-Industrial Complex

    Tax evasion and weapon production: Letterbox arms companies in the Netherlands

    23 December 2015
    Report
    Amongst the big companies using the Dutch evasion routes are a large number of arms manufacturers and major international defence companies. Their almost empty offices or even only mailboxes in the Netherlands gives them the legal possibility pay as little tax as possible with all available legal tricks.
    Authors

    In collaboration with
    Taxes are the financial foundation of modern states. They pay for common goods such as infrastructure, education and health care. Not only individual citizens but also companies profit from these common goods, e.g. the infrastructure for their transports is provided for by states. However, many big companies have a large number of strategies to pay as little tax as possible. For this they do not have to breach laws, as there are many meshes in tax law to slip through. We call this tax evasion. The Netherlands is notorious for its tax evasion possibilities. Amongst the big companies using the Dutch evasion routes are a large number of arms manufacturers and major international defence companies.
    Who are these tax evading arms companies and what are their strategies? In this report, Stop Wapenhandel publishes its findings resulting from a search through the Dutch Chamber of Commerce. We found a large number of arms producing companies with shell companies established in the Netherlands. The major production of these companies takes place in the major western arms producing countries; the United States, United Kingdom, France and Germany. The arms companies turned out to have zero or minimal personnel presence in the Netherlands. Their almost empty offices or even only mailboxes gives them the legal possibility pay as little tax as possible with all available legal tricks.
    The top-100 of global arms companies1 has been used as the starting point for this research. Of the almost US$ 450 billion annual defence production, these top-100 companies are responsible for about half, which is US$ 205 billion. Of the first ten biggest arms companies, seven have legal structures in the Netherlands. And one-third of the hundred biggest defence companies turned out to have one or more holdings in the Netherlands. They shuffle around with money and play tricks with prices and product costs to pay minimal taxes. Most of them are western-based companies, most have high profit rates.
    Tax evasion by these companies is double cynical. Because not only are arms companies using, as all companies do, economic infrastructure paid for by taxes. It is also their products which are paid for by taxes. The lion share of what arms companies produce is bought by governments. Moreover, much of their research and development is subsidized by governments or done in cooperation with publicly funded universities and/or research institutes. As this study shows, arms companies profit in all possible ways from public money but contribute as little as possible. 

    NOS Bedriegt Publiek

    NOS liegt heel Nederland (nog steeds) voor en stuurt aan op conflict met Rusland

    10440959_10152520466055522_7484067358637494717_nAangezien MH17 actueel lijkt te blijven en de mainstream media nog steeds alleen maar de propaganda van de geheime diensten van de VS napraat  hier wat achterliggende informatie.
    Het voorspelbaar falen van de Nederlandse mainstream media bij MH17 zoals ze al 54 keer eerder faalden bij valse vlag aanslagen is diep triest. Het is daarnaast niets minder dan volledig verraad aan de Nederlandse slachtoffers en hun familie.
    Onze Nederlandse politici die het onderzoek in de doofpot proberen te stoppen, van alles geheim verklaren en openlijk liegen en openbare onderzoeken in deze materie actief tegenwerken is helemaal om radeloos van te worden.
    Gelukkig wist Peter Vlemmix en andere nieuwe media wel zelf wat onderzoek te doen en hier blijkt uit dat niet Rusland maar vooral de VS een stevige vinger in de pap lijkt te hebben. Een interessante 15 minuten.
    FLIGHT MH17 Why we still don’t know what happened – Peter Vlemmix
    De bovenstaande informatie lijkt dit eerdere artikel wat een tijd geleden werd geschreven te bevestigen. MH17 was een valse vlag met inmenging van de VS om Europa en Rusland tegen elkaar uit te spelen.
    De NOS werd op 9 september 2014 ontmaskerd door Geenstijl. Dat de mainstream media niet altijd onpartijdig is wisten de meeste mensen waarschijnlijk inmiddels wel. Maar dat de NOS bewust knipt in filmpjes om zo een eigen politieke agenda te zetten is wel  heel schokkend.
    Helemaal als die agenda er eentje is van het aansturen op een conflict met Rusland. Is dat niet gewoon een misdaad tegen de menselijkheid? Aanzetten tot grootschalig conflict via bewuste leugens en manipulatie…
    Hier het filmpje wat laat zien dat de NOS doet alsof Poetin een BBC verslaggever negeert waardoor het lijkt of al de slachtoffers hem koud laten, en zo dus als een soort stille schuldbekentenis van Poetin aan alle kijkers van de NOS werd getoond. In de realiteit nam Poetin echter rustig de tijd om de verslaggever helder en duidelijk te woord te staan. Bekijk eerst het fragment wat de NOS uitstuurde en dan de werkelijkheid…
     NOS faalt en liegt met anti-Rusland propaganda
    Toch fijn om dit zwart op wit te hebben en te weten dat de NOS, betaald met uw belastinggeld, opzettelijk filmpjes verknipt om zo heel kijkend Nederland bewust op het verkeerde been te zetten en op te stoken tegen Rusland. Dat Marcel Gelauff vervolgens ook alles nog probeert te downplayen laat zien hoe misselijkmakend de NOS te werk gaat.
    Dat de NOS bewust een agenda zet terwijl er nog steeds 0 bewijs is van Russische betrokkenheid bij MH17 is misselijkmakend. Daarnaast wijzen alle pijlen van onafhankelijke onderzoekers naar een False Flag van de CIA Puppet president Petro Porosjenko in Kiev en de VS zelf. Want wat zijn de feiten momenteel?
    Uit een wikeleak van 28 April 2006 wordt de huidige president Petro Porosjenko een insider genoemd in de wikileaks. Een insider van de geheime diensten van de VS, kortom een CIA asset.
    Date: 2006 April 28, 14:35 (Friday)Canonical ID: 06KIEV1706_a
    Current Classification: CONFIDENTIAL
    “B. KIEV 1663
    Classified By: Ambassador for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).
    Summary

    1. (C) During an April 28 meeting with Ambassador, Our Ukraine (OU)
    insider Petro Poroshenko emphatically denied he was using his influence with the Prosecutor General to put pressure on Tymoshenko lieutenant Oleksandr Turchynov (refs A and B).
    [ … ]
    false-flag-chalkboard (1)We weten ook dat er een boel rare politieke wisselingen zijn geweest de laatste tijd in de Oekraïne onder buitengewoon verdachte omstandigheden. In februari van dit jaar werden bij opstanden in het land door scherpschutters op de demonstranten geschoten en het lijkt erop dat vooral mensen betrokken bij het huidige regiem daar wel eens achter kunnen zitten. Uiteraard werd deze daad in de schoenen van de oppositie geschoven om zo zelf de macht te grijpen. Een standaard False Flag.
    En voor de mensen met een goed geheugen… scherpschutters die op demonstranten schieten, je oppositie daar de schuld van geven en dat gebruiken om zelf de macht te grijpen… klinkt dat niet bekend ergens? Jawel dat is precies hetzelfde mechanisme wat door de CIA in 2002 werd ingezet om een coup te plegen in Venezuela op toenmalig president Hugo Chavez. Bekijk de documentaire –The Revolution will not be Televised–  voor de details. Precies hetzelfde draaiboek wat 12 jaar geleden werd afgedraait in Zuid Amerika lijkt hier te zijn herhaald in de Oekraïne.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZajyVas4Jg

    Om dit beter te kunnen plaatsen is het belangrijk om weet te hebben van het verleden. En dan specifiek van geheime operaties van bepaalde elementen in de geheime diensten van de VS in Europa onder de codenaam Gladio. Onder deze operatienaam werden vanuit de CIA en de NAVO in de jaren 70 – 80 aanslagen gepleegd op Europese burgerdoelen en politici waarbij dodelijke slachtoffers vielen. Dit terrorisme op ‘bevriende staten’ werd vervolgens in de schoenen geschoven van communistisch extremisme om zo Europa en Rusland tegen elkaar uit te spelen ten voordele van de VS.
    Als ik deze feiten bij elkaar optel dan lijkt het zeer waarschijnlijk dat de ramp met MH17 een nieuwe Operation Gladio is, waarbij bepaalde elementen vanuit de VS koste wat het kost Europa en Rusland tegen elkaar op proberen te zetten en tegen elkaar uit proberen te spelen om daar als VS zelf beter van te worden.
    5f09b0b759be36ba22e1460d3ed0aba63bc242ff
    Dat een CIA puppet uit 2006 in 2014 opgeklommen is tot president van de Oekraïne en vanaf dat moment dit land het centrum is van vreemde vliegtuigongelukken is dan opeens wat beter te begrijpen. Helemaal als er vervolgens een boel oorloghitserij vanuit de mainstream media over het volk wordt losgelaten die dat ongeluk aangrijpen als excuus om maar een conflict met Rusland uit te lokken. Wederom een standaard False Flag truc.
    Bekijk hier deel 3 van een 5 delige documentaire serie: Counter Intelligence, Shining a Light on Black Operations  met de titel: A Strategie of Tension, waarin uitgebreid in wordt gegaan op False Flags vanuit onder meer Israel en de VS.  Operation Gladio komt vanaf minuut 15 uitgebreid aan bod.
    https://vimeo.com/66019647

    Dat de NOS, een door alle Nederlanders betaalde staatszender nu zo door de mand valt met niet minder dan pure oorlogspropaganda is buitengewoon schokkend en totaal onacceptabel.
    Want naast deze duidelijke en bewuste leugens van de NOS, verzwijgen ze ook heel belangrijke informatie. Bijvoorbeeld dit filmpje van de Canadese OSVE onderzoeker Michael Bociurkiw. OSVE voor ‘Organisatie voor Veiligheid en Samenwerking in Europa’. Hij geeft heel duidelijk aan vanaf minuut 6 in het fimpje dat zij duidelijk aanwijzingen hebben gevonden in de brokstukken dat het vliegtuig MH17 met mitrailleurvuur door een ander vliegtuig uit de lucht is gehaald. Maar goed heeft u dat ooit voorbij zien komen bij de NOS?… Terwijl dit toch echt een neutrale ooggetuige is die vanaf het begin op de rampplek aanwezig is geweest.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNMj-M-GDl0 

    Het lijkt er op dat de VS probeert om Europa en Rusland opnieuw tegen elkaar uit te spelen. En met de oprichting van een alternatief voor de IMF Bank waar Rusland betrokken bij was, en het loslaten van de dollar voor de verkoop van olie en gas heeft de VS motief genoeg om Rusland dwars te gaan zitten.
    Maar dat ze dat willen bereiken door Europa en Rusland met elkaar in conflict te brengen met vele slachtoffers en miljarden aan economische schade is van dusdanig psychopatische proporties dat het niets minder dan doodeng is om te zien dat de Nederlandse mainstream media, met de NOS voorop, voluit deze agenda van de VS promoten terwijl dit totaal niet in het belang is van Nederland en Europa.
    Als Nederlanders passief blijven accepteren dat de NOS bewust dit soort leugens aan het volk verkoopt dan kan de politiek van Nederland nog wel eens een hele aparte koers gaan varen, eentje waar het Nederlandse volk totaal niet bij gebaat gaat zijn.
    Op de hoogt blijven van nieuwe berichten? Like ons op facebook en/of volg ons op Twitter!
    Een nieuw gezichtspunt leren kennen, iets geleerd en/of gelachen? Overweeg een donatie/vrijwillig abonnement.
    10660166_810296962371613_472659399662822332_n

    Jaap Hamburger: 'Iran stelt helemaal geen ‘nieuwe eisen’,

      JaapHamburger @hamburger_jaap “Iran stelt helemaal geen ‘nieuwe eisen’, Iran verlangt dat de VS zich houdt aan wat eerder in ‘t MOU overe...