Zoeken in deze blog 🔎🔎

zaterdag 23 mei 2020

Paul Craig Roberts 388


Whoever Is Elected War Is the Policy
Paul Craig Roberts
Exceptional America Believes That the Sovereignty of Other Countries Is Impermissible Unless It Serves Washington’s Interests
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo tells us that despite the record of destroying in whole or part eight countries in recent years, the US is a “force for good.”  This is the Trump regime’s version of the neoconservative doctrine espoused by President Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: “If we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future, and we see the danger here to all of us.”  The notion that Iraq was a danger to the US shows imbecility.  The inhumanity of Washington’s response to the “danger” was sanctions that resulted in the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children. When asked on national television if a half million dead children achieved a justified purpose, the heartless Albright said that it was “a very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it.”
The neoconservatives, with their preference for war uber alles are running the Trump regime.  It appears that the reelection of Donald Trump will be a continuation of the Bill Clinton presidency, the George W. Bush presidency, and the Obama presidency.  Whoever is elected War is the policy.
What Giraldi forgets to mention is that the “terrorist” groups are Washington’s creations and serve as Washington’s tools to advance the war agenda.  
Giraldi gives away too much when he characterizes the Hussein and Gaddafi governments as dictatorships.  Authority was centralized, as it is in Washington, but the governments had to balance contending forces in the societies and were dependent on a large element of consent. It is not certain that both countries were ruled any worse than the US, a country’s whose FBI and Department of Justice (sic) does not hesitate to frame-up the President of the United States and his National Security Advisor. The extraordinary conflict that Democrats brought to US political life since 2016 exceeds the internal conflict that had to be managed by Iraq’s Hussein and Libya’s Gaddafi.
Washington is certainly exceptional, but not in a good way.


Peace process was never intended to give Palestinians a state

Peace process was never intended to give Palestinians a state — true confessions from Council on Foreign Relations

Steven Cook of the Council on Foreign Relations has an article at Foreign Policy saying that the U.S. should phase out aid to Israel and “end the special relationship” because the peace process has attained its real objective: Israel is established as a secure country with a standard of living rivaling the UK and France, and no real military threat.
The piece is shocking because it strips the mask from the peace process, saying just what Edward Said, Rashid Khalidi and Ali Abunimah said decades ago, it was intended to fail, never producing Palestinian sovereignty.
Cook says the U.S.’s “core interest” in the Middle East was always Israel’s “security,” so the peace process needed to spin its wheels forever.
U.S. policymakers have long believed that a two-state solution was the best way to ensure Israel’s security, and U.S. presidents from Bill Clinton to Barack Obama to Donald Trump himself have repeatedly pursued that goal. But the mostly unacknowledged fact about the two-state impasse—and perhaps the reason Washington hasn’t summoned the political will to overcome it—is that it has helped the United States achieve one [of] its core interests in the region: helping to ensure Israeli security….
The “tragedy” for Palestinians is that they trusted the U.S. and “misread” core U.S. interests, Cook explains; but now they have to live forever in Bantustans.
Palestinians "misread" core U.S. interests and thought they included Palestinian sovereignty, but the real interest was Israeli security, and that's why the peace process has been stalemated forever and done nothing but consign Palestinians to Bantustans, Steven A. Cook of the Council on Foreign Relations says.
STEVEN A. COOK 
The tragedy in all this is the permanent dispossession of the Palestinians, who will no doubt be outraged at Washington’s washing its hands of the conflict, sealing their fate to live forever under the boot of the IDF or shoved into Bantustans. They would be justified in their anger. They have also misread core U.S. interests in the Middle East, which really are not concerned with the Palestinians, who, against all evidence, trusted the United States.
The next time anyone talks about Arabs not really meaning what they say or conducting foreign policy like a soukh, remind them that Even a Council on Foreign Relations pundit says the U.S. lied to Palestinians for 25 years of false promises.
The obvious question that arises is Why destroying Palestinian human rights is a core U.S. interest– indeed, why Zionism is a core U.S. interest — and yes the extent to which this reflects the power of the Israel lobby in our politics. For a generation we have had White House mediators who were labeled “Israel’s lawyer,” or who told synagogue audiences “We need to be advocates for Israel,” or who went right fromtheir postings in the Obama White House to Israel advocacy jobs (both Dan Shapiro and Tamara Cofman Wittes). 
None of these jokers ever had any real interest in giving Palestinians any sovereignty.
And how much of the instability of Israel’s neighbors has also served that “core” interest? Israel is sitting pretty, Cook says, because “Iraq and Syria are in a shambles.” Lebanon is crumbling.
We should be grateful to Cook for saying that the point of the peace process was to fail; and that failure was all for Israel’s interest.
The Israel Policy Forum issued a similar insight when Netanyahu began threatening to annex the West Bank last year.
To [annex] will exacerbate partisan divisions on Israel in the United States, ultimately erode Israel’s security, give an unnecessary and clear victory to the BDS movement, and upend decades of carefully calibrated policy on Israel.
“[D]ecades of carefully calibrated policy on Israel” means that Zionists liberal or otherwise give lip service to a Palestinian state but ultimately have no problem with the occupation because the status quo is good for Israel– It is a wealthy democracy-for-Jews– and apartheid for Palestinians is tragic but not worth losing sleep over.
And when a real effort arises to make Israel pay a price for its human rights violations, liberal Zionists will jump to label BDS as antisemitic. 
Thanks to Scott Roth.


NATO DEFENDER

The NATO DEFENDER-Europe 20 Exercise Will Resume In June 2020
23 MAY 2020

After careful review and planning between the U.S. Army Europe and the Polish Department of Defense, Exercise Allied Spirit, an exercise originally planned for May by DEFENDER-Europe 20, will take place on June 5, 2020, in the Drawsko Pomorskie, Poland training area-19. Other countries like Lithuania, Romania and North Macedonia will be the scene for the alleged “wargame“, but also non-members like Sweden, Norway and Finland will be part of it too. 
Poland
Approximately 6,000 U.S. and Polish soldiers will take part in the exercise. Of these, approximately 4,000 US soldiers will come from the headquarters of the 1st Cavalry Division (forward); 2nd Panzer Brigade Combat Team and 3rd Combat Aircraft Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division; and about 2,000 Polish soldiers will come from the 6th Polish Airborne Brigade; 9th Polish Armored Calvary Brigade; and 12th Polish Mechanized Brigade.
Lithuania
The Lithuanian Armed Forces support the exercise and plan to take part in it alongside other NATO allies in order to develop its own division-level headquarters capability at the exercise. The Lithuanian Armed Forces are assisting in ensuring proper preparations, host nation support, and seamless organization of the exercise on the territory of Lithuania.
The Balkans – North Macedonia
The small country, recently re-named North Macedonia instead of Macedonia after some conflicts with EU-member Greece, had to be part of NATO, so during the COVID-19 crisis, NATO pushed to let North Macedonia be part of NATO, on March 27, 2020, it became a NATO member. The people of North Macedonia had no say in this, and there were huge demonstrations in Skopje in 2018-2019 as I recall, having been there during the last demonstration. It was necessary for NATO‘s DEFENDER-20 wargame that North Macedonia should be part of NATO because they are strategically situated between the borders of Greece, Albania, and Bulgaria -- all NATO members -- and Serbia and Kosovo. 
This week President Trump announced that the US is going ahead with scrapping its military agreements with Russia. The US is expected to withdraw soon from the Open Skies Treaty, a 2002 accord involving 35 states, including Russia, that allows countries to conduct unarmed fly-overs of member states with the purpose of monitoring each other’s military facilities. Last year, the US scrapped the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) with Russia and immediately began testing the previously-banned weapons. A prelude to war? Or just as they say, an “exercise“. An “exercise“ for what? To simulate a war with Russia and perhaps China? For Russia and its people. it‘s for sure seen as an act of war, even for Europeans, who have nothing to say in their so-called “democratic“ society about NATO‘s wargames.
A recent poll found that in only three NATO countries—Great Britain, the Netherlands and Lithuania—did a majority of the population want NATO to respond to a Russian attack.
Of course, the UK's support is explainable because it hosts the Statecraft Institute where wars are planed, and the country itself has a "huge" reputation in the spy busines. MI5 and many others play a “dirty“ propaganda war against Russia and its allies, including Syria. I dare to say that the so-called “Arab Spring“ was made at the Statecraft Institute.
The Netherlands, has always been the “good-obedient--deep-state-country“ of the US and therefore of the UK. The Kingdom of the Netherlands, meaning the government, is totally indoctrinated when it concerns Russia. Prince Bernard (an ex-Wehrmacht and SS member), the former prince of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, established the Bilderberg group, a top-secret organization, after the war under the reign of Queen Juliana. The group writes on their website that:
Our meetings are held under the Chatham House Rule, which states that participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s) nor of any other participant may be revealed“.
The meeting for 2020 is postponed.
Rumors have it that Prince Bernard was involved with Eva Perron and the Odessa line program to bring ex-Nazis from Germany to Argentina. With the current political party Democrats 66, the anti-Russia lobby found a great partner to conspire with in spreading anti-Kremlin propaganda.
Lithuania is a different story but you can still find some similarities. Many Lithuanians collaborated with the Germans in WWII. There was no significant violent resistance directed against the Nazis. Some Lithuanians, encouraged by Germany's vague promises of autonomy, cooperated with the Nazis. Pre-war tensions over the Vilnius Regionresulted in a low-level civil war between Poles and Lithuanians. After occupation by the Soviet Union, old sentiments were not forgotten, the cause for independence resulted in an anti-Russia attitude and Russia-bashing. Like other former Soviet-occupied countries, they don‘t recognize the “new-Russia“, which hasn't been under the Soviet system since 1991 and completely changed under the government of President Putin.
Conclusion
While the US Democratic Party attempts to outdo the Republicans in anti-Russian hysteria, the war drive is nevertheless supported by both parties, which see it as essential to project American power around the world. On May 8, 2020, in a crude display of anti-Russian sentiment, US President Donald Trump took to Twitter to laud the United States and Great Britain for their “victory over the Nazis!” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov denounced the statement on the 75th anniversary of Hitler’s defeat in Europe for failing to acknowledge the decisive role played in the event by the Soviet Union. Another act of propaganda of the hybrid war is the rewriting of history. This has seen the European Union claim their own victory and put Hitler at the same level as Stalin as being dictators who both started the war. We all know that it's Germany who started by invading Poland in 1939 and conducted the extermination of the Jewish people, political opponents, prisoners of war, Poles, resistance fighters and gypsies once they occupied a country. Do we want another war? No, I hope mankind, especially Europe has learned from the lessons of WWII, but I am doubtful whether they learned anything at all!

vrijdag 22 mei 2020

A DISASTER IN THE MAKING


A DISASTER IN THE MAKING















 


21 MEI 2020



Henk Tennekes is the toxicologist who established scientific proof in 2010 for the devastating effects of neo-nicotinoids on bee populations.

His warnings were neglected and ridiculed for almost ten years. To his opinion Toxicology is failing because the trade of this field is only helping the industry with licenses for selling deathly toxins. For my movie on food security (in progress) I interviewed Henk Tennekes at his residence in Zutphen the Netherlands, February 2018. Henk Tennekes is diagnosed with Parkinson disease, most probably due to his long and extensive lab work with pesticides like Dieldrin.  The motivation to publish this interview is the recent article (April 2020, see below) in the online newspaper Follow The Money. The publication of this article triggered many reactions and has led to a call for rehabilitation. Henk Tennekes’s story points us to the horrendous mistakes we are making in allowing chemicals and other substances in our agriculture, our food and environment.  The interview reveals the explicit need of another way of testing these chemicals and substances before we allow them to be sold and utilized. The Follow the money article on Tennekes by Vincent Harmsen can be found on: https://www.ftm.nl/artikelen/toxicolo... Tennekes’s full publication on the extinction of the bees can be orderd at: http://www.disasterinthemaking.com/ Camera/ geluid/ montage/ research - David de Jongh 2nd camera - Paul Enkelaar Translation Elycio tekst en vertaling Thanks to: Marc Pieterse for funding the english translation Thanks to: dutch investigative journalistic tv show Zembla for Tjeerd Blacquière’s photo







ASSANGE EXTRADITION: THE CORRUPT POLITICS


ASSANGE EXTRADITION: UK Minister Who Approved Trump’s Request to Extradite Assange Spoke at Secretive US Conferences with People Calling for Him to be ‘Neutralized’



Britain’s former home secretary attended “starlight chats” and “after-dinner cocktails” in off-the-record conferences involving high-level U.S. military and intelligence figures, report Mark Curtis and Matt Kennard. 

Britain’s then Chancellor of Exchequer Sajid Javid (L) welcomes then U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton (R) to 11 Downing Street. (Office of U.S. National Security Advisor, Wikimedia Commons)
Sajid Javid, who was Britain’s home secretary from April 2018 to July 2019, attended “starlight chats” and “after-dinner cocktails” in a series of off-the-record conferences involving high-level U.S. military and intelligence figures at a five-star island resort off the coast of Georgia. Many of those attending have been exposed in WikiLeaks publications and have demanded the organization be shut down. 
Javid signed the Trump administration’s extradition request for Assange in June 2019. He was Britain’s chancellor until his recent resignation. One of the criteria under which a British home secretary can block extradition to the U.S. is if “the person could face the death penalty.”  
The month before being appointed home secretary in April 2018, Javid visited Georgia for the “world forum” of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) — an influential neoconservative U.S. organization with close ties to the U.S. intelligence community. The AEI has run a campaign against WikiLeaks and Assange since 2010. 
It can now be revealed [this article was first published on Feb. 22, 2020] that Javid spoke at the 2018 meeting, as did Jonah Goldberg, a fellow at the AEI who has called for Assange to be “garroted.” In a column published on the AEI website, Goldberg wrote: “WikiLeaks is easily among the most significant and well-publicised breaches of American national security since the Rosenbergs gave the Soviets the bomb. So again, I ask: Why wasn’t Assange garroted in his hotel room years ago? It’s a serious question.”
Bill Kristol, a close associate of the AEI who also spoke in Georgia with Javid, has written a column titled “Whack WikiLeaks” in which he asked: “Why can’t we use our various assets to harass, snatch or neutralize Julian Assange and his collaborators, wherever they are? Why can’t we disrupt and destroy WikiLeaks in both cyberspace and physical space, to the extent possible?” Kristol’s article was promoted on social media by another AEI fellow who spoke in Georgia with Javid. 
Both Goldberg and Kristol spoke at all four of the AEI’s world fora that Javid attended from 2014 to 2018. 

Here at @AEI World Forum. If everything weren't strictly off the record, there would be some interesting things to report.

See Bill Kristol's other Tweets
On the panel with Javid in 2018 was Elliott Abrams, a key neo-conservative architect of the Iraq war of 2003 best-known for his conviction during the Iran-Contra scandal in the Reagan administration. Abrams has lamented WikiLeaks’ document releases. Also on Javid’s panel was Fred Kagan, a senior AEI staffer who served as an adviser to the U.S. military in Afghanistan.
Javid’s signing of the U.S. extradition request was a controversial decision opposed at the time by the Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott. “Julian Assange is not being pursued to protect US national security, he is being pursued because he has exposed wrongdoing by US administrations and their military forces,” Abbott told the British parliament in April 2019 after Assange had been grabbed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London. 
The Trump administration’s extradition request is unprecedented in that the U.K. has never extradited a journalist and publisher to a third country for prosecution. 
The deliberations within the U.K. Home Office about Assange’s extradition and incarceration in Belmarsh maximum-security prison, where he is currently held, are opaque. Declassified sent a Freedom of Information request to the Home Office asking for any telephone call or email mentioning Assange sent to or from Sajid Javid while he was running the department. The Home Office replied: “We have carried out a thorough search and we have established that the Home Office does not hold the information that you have requested.” 
It is unclear if Javid only discussed the Assange extradition request in person while home secretary or if he used a private email or phone to do so. 

Aerial view of the The Cloister hotel at the Sea Island resort where Sajid Javid attended six secretive conferences with an array of high-level military and intelligence figures who have been exposed by WikiLeaks. (lns1122, Flickr)
 Secret Intelligence-Linked Meetings
The attendees, agenda and even the dates of the AEI world forum are a tightly-guarded secret. But Declassified is now publishing the attendance lists and agendas — marked “confidential” — of the last four conferences Javid attended: in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2018 (see end of article). Declassified could not obtain information on Javid’s first two AEI meetings in 2011 and 2013. 
Since attending his first “world forum” at the AEI in 2011, within a year of becoming an MP, Javid subsequently visited six out of eight AEI annual conferences up to 2018. From June 2012 until today, Javid’s parliamentary register of interests records that he has made no overseas trips paid by a third-party except those funded by the AEI. In total, Javid has received £31,285.19 ($40,800) in gifts from the AEI. 
Javid is the most frequent British guest of the U.S. organization, and in most years has been one of only a few British invitees. The only other British regular is Michael Gove, another senior figure in Boris Johnson’s cabinet. 

Adm. Michael S. Rogers, then director of NSA, speaks during Fort Meade’s 100th anniversary gala, June 17, 2017, at Club Meade. (Steve Ruark/Flickr)
The AEI has access to the highest levels of the U.S. intelligence community. Guests at the events Javid attended included two former directors of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and two sitting directors of the National Security Agency (NSA). In 2018, President Donald Trump’s then National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster spoke alongside Javid. Any discussions between the British minister and the intelligence chiefs have remained secret.
The CIA made clear that it is “working to take down” WikiLeaksafter the latter published the largest-ever leak of classified CIA material in 2017. It was recently revealed that the CIA was provided with audio and video of Julian Assange’s private meetings, including privileged conversations with lawyers, in the Ecuadorian embassy by a Spanish security company. The NSA has also been extensively exposed byWikiLeaks
The AEI’s 2016 event saw Javid speaking on a panel titled, “The Challenge Abroad and Implications for the United States,” alongside U.S. Senator Lindsay Graham who called for Assange to be indicted in 2010 solely for receiving leaks. 
Another panel, “Wargaming the Next Attack on the United States,” featured former CIA Director Michael Hayden alongside Marc Thiessen and Gary Schmitt, two AEI staffers who have written extensively on shutting down Assange and WikiLeaks. Also speaking in 2016 was Senator Mitch McConnell, who has called Assange a “high-tech terrorist,” and Congressman Mike Rogers, who called for WikiLeaks source Chelsea Manning to be executed
Javid spoke at the 2015 event with Paul Wolfowitz — an AEI scholar who has been extensively exposed in WikiLeaks releases — about the threat posed by the Islamic State terrorist group. Karl Rove, a former senior adviser to President George W. Bush, also spoke at the 2015 event. It was reported in 2010 that Rove was advising Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt on how Sweden could help the Obama administration prosecute WikiLeaks
Another panel at the 2015 forum was titled, “Fighting a Cyberwar: Is Defense the Only Option?” and featured the former director of the NSA, Keith Alexander; the then director of the NSA, Michael S. Rogers; as well as former CIA director Michael Hayden. 

Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz listens to a reporter’s question in the Pentagon on March 1, 2001. (DoD photo by R. D. Ward. )
“Much talk about the insecurity of the cybersphere has focused on well-publicised breaches,” the panel briefing outlined, “but the reality of the cyberthreat is much broader and more devastating than most assume.” The question posed was: “Is our only choice to bar the doors, or has the time come to take it to the enemy? And what will that mean?” 
David Petraeus, another former CIA director, spoke at the AEI’s 2014 event alongside former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney, a member of the AEI’s board, and John Bolton, often seen as the most belligerent pro-war figure in Washington, who was a senior fellow at the AEI before becoming Trump’s national security adviser. While at the AEI, Bolton wrote ambiguously: “As for WikiLeaks itself, and anyone cooperating with its malicious enterprise, now is the time to test our cyber-warfare capabilities. Fire away.” 

American Enterprise Institute headquarters in the Daniel A. D’Aniello Building, also called the Andrew Mellon Building, in Washington, D.C. (Jonathunder, Wikimedia Commons)
Assange and the AEI
The AEI has been running a campaign against WikiLeaks—and Assange specifically — throughout the U.S. media since 2010. The organization’s website lists 20 articles or events tagged with “Julian Assange” and 43 articles tagged with “WikiLeaks,” all of which are negative.
AEI resident fellow Marc A. Thiessen has written numerous articles demonizing Assange and the work of WikiLeaks. One article titled,  “WikiLeaks must be stopped,” which is published on the AEI website, concludes, “If left unmolested, Assange will become even bolder and inspire others to imitate his example.” Another article in May 2019, also on the AEI website, is titled, “Assange is a spy, not a journalist. He deserves prison.” Thiessen attended all the same annual AEI fora as Javid from 2014-18. 
In 2012, the AEI sponsored an event in Washington, D.C., called “Assange’s asylum in Correa’s Ecuador: Last refuge for scoundrels?” hosted by the AEI’s visiting fellow Roger F. Noriega, another figure critical of Assange. The question to be answered was listed as, “Can Ecuador’s president successfully whitewash his image by advancing Assange’s anti-American crusade?”
Sajid Javid and the American Enterprise Institute did not respond to requests for comment. 

Matt Kennard is head of investigations and Mark Curtis editor, of Declassified UK, a media organization investigating U.K. foreign, military and intelligence policies. They tweet at @DCKennard and @markcurtis30. Follow Declassified on twitter at @DeclassifiedUK
This article is from Declassified UK.


De Groene NAVO-Propagandist Maarten Muns

  Op zoek naar een modus vivendi met Rusland Containment of detente? Welke ideologie er ook regeert, Rusland blijft een expansieve macht. ‘H...