If You Provoke the Entire World, Something May Happen

Andre Vitchek – 7-11-2019

The United States believes that it is so invincible, exceptional and so frightening that no one would ever dare to protest, let alone defend its people against constant humiliation, economic embargoes and military threats.

It used to be like this for quite some time. In the past, the West used to bully the world before and after each well-planned assault. Also, well-crafted propaganda used to be applied.

It was declared that things are done ‘legally’ and rationally. There were certain stages to colonialist and imperialist attacks: “define your goals”, “identify your victim”, “plan”, “brainwash your own citizens and people all over the world”, and then, only then, “bomb some unfortunate country back to the stone ages”.

Now, things are slightly different. “The leader of the free world” wakes up in the middle of the night, and he tweets. What comes from his computer, tablet or phone, (or whatever he uses), is spontaneous, unpolished and incredibly dangerous. Similar in substance to what made him wake up in the middle of the night, in a first place.

He does not seem to plan; he shoots off from the hip. Today, as I am writing this essay, he has declared that he has “five strategies for Venezuela.” Bravo!

Earlier, as he was about to land outside London, he embarked on insulting the Mayor of the British capital, calling him names. A bit like we used to do to each other when we were five years old in the neighborhood playground.

He has been regularly offending Mexico, and of course Iran, China, and Russia.

He basically tells the leader of the most populous nation on earth – China – to “be there”, at the G20 Summit, or else.

Whenever he and his lieutenants are in the mood, they get busy antagonizing everyone: Cuba and Nicaragua, North Korea, Venezuela, Bolivia, and Syria.

Of course, he’s not shy about also threatening the ‘biggest bad boys,’ Russia, and China.

Anyone, at any time, could easily land on the proverbial hit list of President Trump, and hawks of his United States of A. It could be India (which, during ‘good submissive times’ is called by the West the “biggest democracy,” or perhaps Turkey (militarily the second mightiest NATO country).  The world had been converted into an entity which appears to be run by a bloodthirsty and unpredictable dictatorship. The world is an entity where everyone is terrified of being purged, imprisoned, starved to death, or directly attacked, even liquidated.

Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were both ‘suave’ presidents. They were loved in Europe, as they knew how to speak politely, how to dine elegantly, and how to commit mass murder in a ‘rational, righteous way’; ‘old-fashioned, European-style.’

The brutal, vulgar ways of G.W. Bush and Donald Trump, have been consistently shocking all those individuals who are pleased when things are done ‘stylishly’ and ‘politically correctly’; be it a coup or the starvation to death of millions through embargoes. Or be it invasions or ‘smart’ bombing (‘smart’ meaning away from the inquisitive eyes of the public).

But it is not only the ‘offended sensibilities’ of predominantly European population, that matter.

The danger is that someone might take Donald Trump seriously, and respond accordingly.

In the past, verbal insults similar to those unleashed now by the US President could easily have led to a war, or at least to the breaking up of diplomatic relationships.

And now?

In case Westerners have not realized it, yet – people all over the world are indignant. I talk to Libyans, Afghans, Iraqis, Venezuelans, Cubans, Iranians: they hate what comes from Washington; hate it with passion. They know that what is being done to them is terrorism, thuggery. But for now, they do not know how to defend themselves. Not yet, but they are thinking.

The entire world now resembles a brutal ghetto, or a slum, where a heavily armed gang controls the streets, and in fact every corner and alley.

At least in the past, subjugated people were able to hide behind decorative words and ideological pirouettes. They were able to ‘save face.’ They were sodomized in the name of ‘freedom,’ ‘democracy,’ and ‘human rights.’ Now, a horrible reality is flying directly in all directions: “You will do as you are told!” “It is us who will decide.” “Obey, because we said so.” Entire nations are being reduced to states of slaves or even worse – lap dogs.

As everyone is well aware, even lackeys and slaves can hold grudges. And abused dogs can bite.

Throughout history, slaves rebelled. True heroes came from rebellious and enslaved nations.

This, what we have now on our planet, is not good, not a healthy situation.

The more countries that are being intimidated, the higher the chances are that somewhere, soon, things will let go; collapse.

Only terrible fear assures, so far, that if a Syrian or a Libyan or an Afghan city is leveled to the ground, there is no real defense or retaliation: urban areas in the USA stay intact.

Only incredible patience of the Russian or Chinese leaders guarantees that, so far, even as their economies are being battered by ridiculous sanctions, the two powerful nations do not retaliate and ruin the US financial system (which is only a paper tiger).

Trump dares. He tortures and humiliates more than half of the world, then looks straight ahead and laughs: “So what are you going to do now?”

So far, the world is doing nothing.

Even the proud and mighty Iran is not ‘crossing the line.’ As millions of its people are suffering because of insane sanctions, the Iranian navy is not yet engaging the US battleships that are cruising very near its shores.

Even as more and more US bases are being built right next to both Russia and China’s borders, so far there are no substantial military bases being erected by Moscow or Beijing in places such as Nicaragua, Cuba, or Venezuela.

All this may change, soon.

And the much dreaded (by Washington) “domino effect” may actually take place.

Non-Western leaders have also their ‘bad days’ and terrible nights. They also wake up in the middle of the night, and want to communicate and to act.

Imagine an Iranian leader, waking up at 2AM, and suddenly feeling overwhelmed by wrath, because Iranian men, women and children are suffering, for no reason, as a result of the perverse sadism coming from the West. What if he Tweets an insult, too? What if he just orders, on a spur of the moment, to have all those obsolete US aircraft carriers and destroyers that are floating in the vicinity, sunk? Iran can do it: everyone knows that it can! Technically, militarily, it is easy: those ships are just sitting ducks.

Then what? Will Washington nuke Iran?

Someone may say: The West is killing millions every year, anyway. Better to fight it, in order to stop it, once and for all. Others may join. And then what? Will Trump give orders to kill tens of millions, just to maintain control over the world?

What if the US navy vessels bump into a Russian or a Chinese ship, as they almost did in the South China Sea recently? What if a Russian or Chinese ship sinks, and dozens of sailors die? And there is a retaliation? Then what?

What if Syria has enough and begins shooting down Israeli military jets that are bombing it? What if they start attacking North American and European ‘special forces’ that are still located, illegally, on its territory?

The US is engaged all over the world. France and the UK, too. And if you talk to the people in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, you very soon realize what the real feelings towards Washington are!

If you provoke the entire world, something very terrible may happen!

Now, there is an entire coalition of powerful nations, ready to defend themselves, and also defend each other. Militarily, economically, and ideologically.

The world is not a slave of the West, or the United States.

This is the new world. Considering the horrors that are being spread by the West, against Asia, Africa, “Latin America,” the Middle East, and Oceania, these victim nations are unbelievably patient and forgiving. But the USA and Europe should not take this tolerance for granted. They should not provoke these former and present victims.

Now, the people from the previously ruined part of the world are beginning to speak up: about what is being done to them – to China and Russia, to South America and Africa, and the Middle East. With awareness comes courage. With courage comes strength.

The West had better stop misinterpreting the kindness. It is not a weakness. Not anymore. Think twice before you speak (or Tweet). Think a thousand times, before you act!

______________________________________

 

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on If You Provoke the Entire World, Something May Happen

British Marines Seize Oil Tanker Headed For Syria In “Aggressive” Operation

                                                   Grace 1 supertanker

A huge development Thursday regarding enforcement of Iran sanctions and the West’s economic war on both Damascus and Tehran: British Royal Marines seized an oil tanker in Gibraltar off Spain’s southern coast while it was en route to Syria in what’s being called an unprecedented and aggressive move to enforce EU sanctions.

As critics of the West’s sanctions policy on Syria are noting: the European Union has for years allowed advanced weaponry to flow into the hands of anti-Assad jihadists, but now it acts swiftly to block vital oil to the war-torn and starved population.

From Reuters:

The Grace 1 tanker was impounded in the British territory at the mouth of the Mediterranean Sea, after sailing around Africa from the Gulf. Shipping data reviewed by Reuters suggests it had been loaded with Iranian oil off the coast of Iran, although its documents say the oil is from neighboring Iraq.

Reports say Gibraltar authorities (Gibraltar is a British Overseas Territory) acted on EU sanctions that have been in place for years against Syria; however one EU sanctions and legal expert told Reuters: “This is the first time that the EU has done something so public and so aggressive. I imagine it was also coordinated in some manner with the U.S. given that NATO member forces have been involved.”

The ship has been identified as the Grace 1 — a Panamanian-flagged tanker managed by Singapore-based IShips Management Pte Ltd. — which had apparently taken the unusual step of sailing all the way around the tip of Africa instead of the Suez canal from the Iraqi port of Basra.

European officials believe it was on its way to the Syrian port of Banyas and its refinery: “That refinery is the property of an entity that is subject to European Union sanctions against Syria,” Gibraltar Chief Minister Fabian Picardo said, according to Reuters. “With my consent, our port and law enforcement agencies sought the assistance of the Royal Marines in carrying out this operation,” he added.

Royal Marines boarded and took control of the tanker heading for Syria. — The Daily Star

Illustrative photo of Royal Marines, via the UK MOD.

We noted that as early as the Spring of this year Tehran began running the high risk gambit  of restarting its crude transfers to Syria, also at a time Syrian government areas have been feeling the crushing impact of record fuel shortages after the White House imposed new total oil sanctions on Syria.

A previous CNBC report noted that, “Tanker-tracking firms believe Iran is once again shipping crude oil to Syria, resuming the illicit trade as tensions with Washington rise and the Islamic Republic faces increasing international isolation.” Specifically a one million barrel delivery was successfully made through the Syrian port of Baniyas in early May, the first since the end of 2018, according to TankerTrackers.com and ClipperData.

Both the Grace 1 as well as prior tankers attempting to reach Syria’s coast are accused of “ghosting” – which involves tankers switching off their transponders at sensitive transit points.

Critics of the West’s renewed devastating fuel sanctions on Syria, which has resulted in miles-long fuel queues outside gas stations – have pointed out that the EU has for years allowed weapons shipments to “rebels” seeking to ouster President Bashar al-Assad, while at the same time starving the populace of fuel.

Since the war in Syria started, the sickening pattern has been this: western and gulf weapons pour into Syria’s proxy war, refugees flee the resulting chaos, sanctions strangle the common people further, and refugees who ultimately return then face the West’s renewed slow economic strangulation of the war-torn country.

And we predicted before: the White House still fundamentally prioritizes weakening Syria as crucial in its ultimate goal of regime change in Tehran. In this sense, the “long war” for Syria could merely be in its middle phase, with the waters in both the East Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf set to continue heating up.

_______________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on British Marines Seize Oil Tanker Headed For Syria In “Aggressive” Operation

The American Historical Amnesia Behind Pompeo’s Claim of ‘40 Years of Unprovoked Iranian Aggression’

From a CIA coup supporting the US appointed Shah, who was hated by Iranians, to enabling chemical attacks against Iran, to shooting down a Iranian civilian airliner, and training terrorists – ‘aggression’ between the US and Iran is overwhelmingly one-sided.


Brett Wilkins – 6, 24, 2019 “Information Clearing House
   Someone attacked two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman last week. The Trump administration wants the world to believe that Iran is the culprit. Yet there is no serious evidence that Tehran was behind the attacks on the Norwegian and Japanese ships. Not only is there no proof of Iranian involvement, such an attack by Iran makes no sense at all. Japan and Iran are friends. Just last month, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe – who was visiting Tehran during the tanker incident – affirmed this friendship in the presence of Donald Trump during the US president’s recent state visit to Japan. Most importantly of all, the crew and owner of the Japanese tanker attacked in the gulf vehemently reject the US claim that the vessel was damaged by a mine, asserting instead that a “flying object” struck the ship.

Still, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo blamed Iran for what he called a “blatant assault” on the tankers. Pompeo also said that the attacks “should be understood in the context of 40 years of unprovoked aggression” against the US and other “freedom-loving nations” by Iran. There is no such history. Iran hasn’t started a war in the last century. The true context which must be understood is one of a century of US and Western exploitation of Iranian people and resources, and decades of US threats and aggression against Iran that once reportedly included a plan to stage a false flag attack very similar to last week’s tanker incident.

Destroying Democracy

Many Americans suffer a collective historical amnesia that renders a true and complete understanding of the causes, conduct and consequences of their nation’s perpetual conflicts all but impossible. This explains why most Americans trace the origins of US-Iran enmity to the 1979 hostage crisis, when Islamists occupied the US Embassy in Tehran for 444 days and Iran was transformed from close ally to archenemy practically overnight. US leaders and media portrayed those young revolutionaries as wild-eyed Muslim fanatics consumed by irrational hatred of the United States. Their legitimate grievances, chief among these the repression and brutality of the US-backed regime they dethroned, were ignored.

Pompeo’s preposterous claim that the US wants to “restore democracy” to Iran begs the question of when has the U.S. ever helped Iran? In the early 1950s had democracy when the beloved reformist prime minister Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh set out to end British and American exploitation of Iranian oil resources by nationalizing the assets of companies including the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, which despite its equitable-looking hyphenation was really a British-owned monopoly known today as BP. Iran’s U.S. installed monarch, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, had sold out his country to foreign capitalists to the extent that one State Department official wrote in 1942 that the US would “soon be in the position of actually running Iran.”

Emboldened, perhaps, by President Harry S. Truman’s hollow promise to “assist free people to work out their own destinies in their own way,” Iranians rallied behind Mossadegh as he fought to take back from foreign predators what was rightfully Iran’s. In addition to nationalization, he expelled foreign technicians from oil refineries and even broke off diplomatic relations with Britain. Mossadegh’s was the most popular and democratic government Iranians had ever known. Time magazine, in naming him its “Man of the Year” for 1951, called him “the Iranian George Washington.”

The British were nearly as infuriated by Mossadegh as they had been by the original George Washington, and London enlisted its former colony to hatch a plan to depose the Iranian leader. Truman demurred but his successor, Dwight D. Eisenhower, was game. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles and his brother, Central Intelligence Agency Director Allen Dulles, had both previously worked as lawyers at a firm that represented Anglo-Iranian Oil. In 1953 the CIA launched a coup, codenamed Operation Ajax, which fomented unrest through violence including false flag attacks on religious leaders that were then blamed on pro-Mossadegh communists. A very reluctant Shah was swiftly restored to his throne and Mossadegh was deposed and imprisoned. US corporations then seized control of 40 percent of Iran’s oil fields.

In order to help the Shah maintain an iron grip on Iranians, the CIA, along with Israel’s Mossad, created SAVAK, the notoriously brutal state security force whose tortures included amputations, electric chairs and anal rape with electric cattle prods. The CIA reportedly taught SAVAK how to torture men and women and filmed these sessions for instructional purposes. Meanwhile, five successive US presidents lavished the Shah with aid and arms. Jimmy Carter, the so-called “human rights president,” feted the dictator at a 1978 White House New Year’s Eve soirée, toasting his “brilliant leadership” as angry protests against his ill-fated regime’s tyranny raged outside.

“Unprovoked Aggression?”

Forty years ago, long-simmering animosity toward the United States inevitably boiled over, culminating in the now-familiar events of those 444 days in 1979-81. Instead of acknowledging its role in stoking the flames of revolt, the Carter and Ronald Reagan administrations partnered with Saddam Hussein in neighboring Iraq as it attempted to thwart Iran’s nascent Islamic Republic. In 1980 the US encouraged Hussein to invade Iran, providing crucial support – including the transfer of deadly chemical and biological materials Iraq weaponized and unleashed upon Iranians and Iraqi Kurds in an eight-year war of attrition that claimed more than a million lives. Reagan officials knew for years that Iraq was attacking Iran but kept up US support while publicly denying knowledge of Iraq’s war crimes.

As the war died down, a US attack on Iran further inflamed Iranians. On July 3, 1988, the USS Vincennes, which was in Iranian waters, shot down Iran Air Flight 655, killing all 290 passengers and crew aboard, including 66 children. An indignant Reagan blamed the “barbaric Iranians” for the wholesale aerial slaughter; Vice President George H.W. Bush, who was running for president, infamously spat, “I will never apologize for the United States of America. Ever. I don’t care what the facts are.”

Fast-forward to the second Bush presidency, when provocation toward Iran escalated to the brink of all-out war. In addition to senior US officials’ constant threats and even jokes about bombing “Axis of Evil” member Iran, the US secretly deployed Special Forces troops inside Iran on reconnaissance missions and to forge alliances with dissident groups. Chief among these was the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (MEK), a State Department-designated terrorist group that had previously assassinated six US officials when it was fighting the Shah’s regime. Despite this, the US military secretly trained MEK fighters while the terror group paid leading US officials to lobby for its cause.

The Bush administration also pressured the World Bank into suspending emergency relief aid after the 2003 Bam earthquake, which killed more than 26,000 Iranians, and imposed harsh new economic sanctions on Iran which continue to cause great suffering for ordinary Iranians even as a well-connected elite grows fantastically wealthy. Bush-era war plans against Iran reportedly even included a false flag plot hatched in Vice President Dick Cheney’s office to send Navy SEALs in boats disguised as Iranian naval vessels to attack US warships in the Straits of Hormuz.

The menacing of Iran continued unabated through most of Barack Obama’s administration, when Israeli and/or US assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists, cyber attacks and sabotage – actions that would surely be seen as acts of war if they were committed against the United States – occurred along with the usual threats of war. Meanwhile, the administration sold a record amount of weapons to Iran’s adversaries, further inflaming tensions in the world’s most volatile region. Obama ultimately chose cautions cooperation over confrontation with Iran. His wise decision led to the landmark 2015 Iran nuclear deal, a highly controversial move that faced strong bipartisan opposition from liberal lawmakers as well as from Republicans including neoconservative hawks like John Bolton, who has been itching to bomb Iran for decades – and who is now President Donald Trump’s national security advisor.

The Real Aggressor

US and Israeli intelligence agencies have long asserted that Iran is not trying to develop nuclear weapons, and even President Trump has admitted that Iran was complying with the terms of the nuclear deal. Trump nevertheless withdrew the US from the agreement, with predictably dangerous consequences as Iran’s leaders, like so many before them, realized that a deal with the United States all too often isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. The administration and its allies in Congress and the corporate mainstream media have ratcheted up their warmongering against Iran to a near-fever pitch, all based upon “evidence” every bit as suspect as the lies that led to the disastrous invasion and occupation of Iraq. It is unclear who attacked the Norwegian and Japanese oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman last week. What is clear is that a world wary of US lies and endless war isn’t buying the Trump administration’s story.

Actors including Israel, Saudi Arabia and some in the Trump administration seem hell-bent on waging a war against Iran that would ideally end in the overthrow of that country’s Islamist regime. Iran isn’t without its serious faults. However, these pale in comparison to those of the US, which has – and has used – nuclear weapons, staged or supported numerous coups, attacked half a dozen Middle Eastern countries already this century and nearly encircled Iran with military bases. Iran has no nuclear weapons, no bases within 10,000 kilometers of the United States and has never directly attacked the US or, of course, overthrown its government. Who is the real aggressor here?

 

_________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on The American Historical Amnesia Behind Pompeo’s Claim of ‘40 Years of Unprovoked Iranian Aggression’

Iran Had the Legal Right to Shoot Down US Spy Drone

Marjorie Cohn – 6, 24, 2019

Information Clearing House” –  On June 19, an Iranian surface-to-air missile shot down an unmanned U.S. surveillance drone. The White House claimed that its drone was at least 20 miles from Iran, in international airspace, while Iran maintains the drone was in Iranian airspace. Iran presented GPS coordinates showing the drone eight miles from Iran’s coast, which is inside the area of 12 nautical miles that is considered Iran’s territorial waters under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Iran has the legal right to control its own airspace. The United States has no lawful claim of self-defense that would justify a military attack on Iran.

Both the U.S. and Iran are parties to the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation, which provides “that every State has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory.”

Iran’s sovereignty over its airspace includes the right to shoot down an unmanned drone present without consent. “Although there is no black letter law on the question, state practice suggests that a state can use force against unmanned drones that have entered its airspace without consent,” Ashley Deeks and Scott R. Anderson wrote at Lawfare.

“Assuming that for once Washington is telling the truth” about how far the U.S. drone was from Iran when it was downed, “it is still undeniable that Iran has the right to demand identification from any aircraft flying this near its territory,” H. Bruce Franklin, former Air Force navigator and intelligence officer, wrote on Facebook. U.S. Air Defense Identification Zones extend 200 miles from the U.S. border. “Any unidentified drone” which flew that close to the U.S. “would most likely be shot down,” Franklin added.

Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations, Majid Takht-Ravanchi, wrote to the Security Council that the drone did not respond to several radio warnings before it was shot down.

A  U.S. Attack on Iran Would Not Be Lawful Self-Defense

If the United States attacks Iran, it would act in violation of the United Nations Charter. The Charter only allows the use of military force in self-defense after an armed attack or with Security Council approval.

The International Court of Justice held in the 1986 Nicaragua case that an “armed attack” only includes “the most grave forms of the use of force.” No one was injured or killed when Iran shot down the U.S. drone since it was unmanned. Indeed, Trump told reporters it made “a big, big difference” that a U.S. pilot was not threatened.

Iran did not carry out an armed attack against the United States. Under the Caroline case, there must exist “a necessity of self-defence, instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation.” There is no imminent necessity for a U.S. military attack on Iran.

Congress Has Not Authorized a Military Attack on Iran

A U.S. strike on Iran would also violate the War Powers Resolution, which lists three situations in which the president can introduce U.S. Armed Forces into hostilities:

First, after a declaration of war by Congress, which has not occurred since World War II. Second, in “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.” The loss of a U.S. drone does not constitute a “national emergency.” Third, when there is “specific statutory authorization,” such as an Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF).

In 2001, Congress adopted an AUMF that authorized the president to use military force against individuals, groups and countries that had contributed to the 9/11 attacks. In the past 18 years, three presidents have misused the 2001 AUMF to justify multiple military interventions.

This is happening again. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has mounted a campaign to link Iran to al-Qaeda in order to make a case that the 2001 AUMF would allow the U.S. to attack Iran. But, as Johns Hopkins professor Bruce Riedel told Al-Monitor, “Rather than being secretly in bed with each other as some have argued, al-Qaeda had a fairly hostile relationship with the Iranian regime.”

On June 19, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives passed a $1 trillion appropriations bill that includes a provision repealing the 2001 AUMF within eight months. Introduced by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-California), it says the AUMF “has been used to justify a broad and open-ended authorization for the use of military force and such an interpretation is inconsistent with the authority of Congress to declare war and make all laws for executing powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States.” But the GOP-controlled Senate will not pass the bill with the AUMF repeal provision in it.

The U.N. Security Council Should Act

Tensions between the United States and Iran have been steadily escalating. One year ago, the U.S. pulled out of the multilateral 2015 nuclear deal, which was working to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Trump then reimposed devastating sanctions against Iran, whose oil exports have fallen by one-half.

After Trump designated Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a terrorist group in April, Iran threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which one-third of the world’s oil passes. Iran’s Supreme National Security Council designated the U.S. Central Command a terrorist organization. Trump ordered 2,500 additional troops and an aircraft carrier to the region.

On June 13, two oil tankers — one Japanese, the other Norwegian with a 50 percent Russian crew — were attacked in the Gulf of Oman. The United States blamed Iran, which denied responsibility for the attack. Neither Japan nor Norway have said Iran was responsible. “That Iran would target a Japanese and a friendly Russian crewed ship is a ludicrous allegation,” Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, wrote on his blog.

Besides being illegal, a U.S. attack on Iran would prove disastrous to the entire region, and indeed, the world. Congress should repeal the 2001 AUMF and assert its authority under the War Powers Resolution. The Security Council must convene immediately and act to fulfill its duty under the Charter to restore international peace and security to the Gulf region.

The New York Times is reporting that on June 20, President Trump ordered military strikes against Iran to retaliate for its shootdown of a U.S. drone, but then pulled back and didn’t launch them. Officials told the Times that Trump had approved attacks on Iranian radar and missile batteries.

Trump tweeted, “We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights when I asked, how many will die. 150 people, sir, was the answer from a General. 10 minutes before the strike I stopped it, not proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone.”

Nevertheless, shortly after midnight on June 21, Newsweek reported that regional U.S. military assets have been put on 72-hour standby.

______________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on Iran Had the Legal Right to Shoot Down US Spy Drone

More US Fake News About Iran

US Military Bases Surrounding Iran. Who Is Threatening Who?

[The US warmongers are continuing to follow the Israeli model of attack, attack, attack, and then accuse their victims of being the aggressors. The Trump government has backed out of the international agreement to not develop more nuclear weapons, waged economic war with crippling sanctions against Iran (hurting others in the region), sent military troops to the region, backed Israeli attacks against Iran, and sent numerous war ships and aircraft carrier groups to the region to threaten Iran. All these are acts of war, or intended to provoke a nation to war. How crazy is it to then stand back and point their finger at Iran who has not attacked or threatened any nation?

Now the latest fake news is trying to blame Iran for holes in the side of a Japanese oil tanker in the gulf of Oman … claiming it was an Iranian mine – but the evidence and eye witnesses all claim it was two “flying objects” that hit the ship, not mines. How many lies and wars will the Israelis and US Government get away with?

Now, for reasons unknown, Trump has chosen to cancel the planned military strike on Iran and the war hawks in Congress are complaining loudly about his decision. They are all lying liars and should be exposed as the liars and murderers that they are.

For an excellent, and surprising, news report see this by Tucker Carlson. -ed.]

6-21-2019 – Pravda

Cartoonish Bolton, Pompous Pompeo, their henchmen, and like-minded lying Pentagon hardliners are going all-out to manufacture a case for war on Iran based on disinformation, Big Lies and fake news.

The US navy claims it removed limpet mine fragments and a magnet from one of two tankers attacked in the Gulf of Oman last week, whether true or false unclear. Either way doesn’t matter.

According to Commander Sean Kido, head of US Naval Forces Central Command’s explosive ordinance dive and  salvage task group:

“The limpet mine that was used in the attack (sic) is distinguishable and also strikingly bearing a resemblance to Iranian mines that have already been publicly displayed in Iranian military parades,” adding:

Damage done to the tanker was “not consistent with an external flying object hitting the ship” – contradicting eyewitnesses to the incident aboard the vessel.

The above remarks have no credibility or validity. Not a shred of evidence suggests Iranian responsibility for the Gulf of Oman incident or weeks earlier regional ones.

Last Friday, Yutaka Katada, president of the company owning the damaged Kokuka Courageous refuted the Trump regime’s claim, saying there’s a “high chance” that a “flying object” struck the ship, not a mine as the Trump regime claimed.

“The crew told us something came flying at the ship, and they found a hole. Then some crew witnessed the second shot,” he explained.

No credible evidence backs the Trump regime claim about Iranian responsibility for what happened.

Aside from Britain sticking to the fabricated claim, other European countries doubt it.

A grainy video of an alleged Iranian vessel removing an unexploded mine attached to the Kokuka Courageous could easily have been doctored, a stunt the US pulled and its imperial accomplices pulled before.

Iranian Defense Minister General Amir Hatami said accusations “against Iran are totally a lie and I dismiss them firmly,” adding:

The US “can show any footage…but it cannot be used as evidence.” Nor can phony claims about mine fragments and a magnet linked to Iran because the US navy says so.

Washington unjustifiably justifies all its wars of aggression and other hostile actions based on bald-faced Big Lies and deception.

No official statements about US adversaries by Washington or the Pentagon are credible. Demonizing them builds a case for regime change by war or other hostile actions based on fabricated claims.

Facts on the ground don’t matter, just perceptions regurgitated repeatedly by establishment media.

Propaganda works as intended. It precedes and accompanies all US wars of aggression, the dominant fourth estate providing press agent services, convincing the public to support what demands condemnation, or at least not strongly express opposition.

Bipartisan hardliners vilified Iran for the past 40 years, war plans to topple its government prepared long ago, updated over time but never implemented.

Will this time be different? Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) head Ali Shamkhani believes not, saying:

“Despite a propaganda campaign against Iran by (its enemies), no war will break out because there is no reason for a war,” adding:

The Trump regime aims to harm Iran’s economy by exerting “maximum” pressure. It’s not working because Iranians are resisting its hostile actions.

The harder the US pushes, the greater the enmity of the Iranian people against Washington’s imperial agenda, the same is true in Syria, Venezuela, North Korea, and elsewhere.

“Iran once again will turn all US sanctions into opportunity,” Shamkhani believes.

Separately on Wednesday, Iranian President Hassan Houhani called US sanctions “economic terrorism and a crime against humanity,” adding:

“The entire world believes that Iran had exercised strategic patience and logic, and its moves have been based on international regulations.”

Iran “fully live(s) up to its (JCPOA) commitments,” affirmed by IAEA monitors. “Despite what some countries say, what we are doing is the least we could do” to stay committed to the agreement.

Under Article 26, suspension of its voluntary commitments is permitted by Iran if one or more other countries impose sanctions on the country relating to the agreement, the JCPOA stating:

“Iran has stated that it will treat such a re-introduction or re-imposition of the sanctions specified in Annex II, or such an imposition of new nuclear-related sanctions, as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part.”

Under Article 36, Iran is afforded the same right, according to the JCPOA Dispute Resolution Mechanism. Tehran remains in compliance with the agreement despite increasing the level of its uranium enrichment and storage, along with retaining its heavy water.

The IAEA earlier said it may increase its uranium enrichment level while respecting the nuclear treaty.

They’re complying with the JCPOA along with Russia and China. The Trump regime flagrantly breached it by pulling out. So did Britain, France, and Germany by failing to observe its provisions, promising adherence with no follow-through.


http://www.pravdareport.com/world/142476-fake_news_iran/

___________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on More US Fake News About Iran

Hot Mic: Pompeo Blabs That US Was Behind Failed Venezuela Coup

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finian Cunningham – 6-12-2019

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just spilled the beans on Washington’s regime-change maneuver in Venezuela. The US is not supporting a popular pro-democracy movement, as the official media narrative goes.

There is no movement against incumbent President Nicolas Maduro worth talking about, admits Pompeo. It’s all an orchestration by Washington. In short, a criminal plot.

The clumsy admission was reported by the Washington Post which obtained an audio recording of Pompeo’s unguarded comments during a recent closed-door meeting in New York. His blundering blab is a spectacular own goal.

The meeting was held with Jewish groups apparently on a range of international topics, including the Trump administration’s Middle East policy. Pompeo seemed unaware his remarks were being recorded. His comments are therefore a stark leveling of reality, dispelling the media spin put out by the Trump administration of “supporting democracy” in Venezuela.

It also vindicates Russia’s steadfast support for the Venezuelan government, and Moscow’s consistent condemnation of Washington’s interference in the South American country.

In his off-guard remarks, Pompeo is scathing about the fecklessness of so-called opposition in Venezuela. He indicates that the US-backed movement has failed because of squabbling among political figures vying for leadership. With a tone of understatement, the top American diplomat laments that Washington’s efforts at organizing the disparate opposition have “proven devilishly difficult”.

“Our conundrum, which is to keep the opposition united, has proven devilishly difficult”, says Pompeo, as reported by the Post. “The moment [President] Maduro leaves, everybody’s going to raise their hands and [say], ‘Take me, I’m the next president of Venezuela’. It would be forty-plus people who believe they’re the rightful heir to Maduro”.

That’s a stunning slip. What this senior US official blabbed is a blunt confirmation that the self-declared “interim president” Juan Guaido does not have any popular support among Venezuelans.

Guaido declared himself “interim president” back in January this year, days after Maduro was inaugurated for his second term of the presidency. Immediately, Washington announced that it was recognizing Guaido as the “legitimate leader” of Venezuela.

Other Latin American and most European countries also quickly followed Washington’s policy.

Nevertheless, the vast majority of UN member states, including Russia and China, continue to recognize Maduro as the valid, democratically elected president.

Indeed, Moscow has vehemently denounced Washington for interfering in Venezuela’s sovereign affairs with an illicit agenda for regime change. Russian President Vladimir Putin this week warned that US policy in Venezuela was leading to “disaster”.

In effect, Pompeo is candidly admitting that Washington is orchestrating Venezuela’s political tensions – and failing.

The corollary of this is that the so-called opposition to the Maduro government has conspicuously failed to mobilize any significant popular challenge to the elected authorities. A military coup attempt on 30 April, led by US-backed figure Juan Guaido fizzled into a minor debacle.

Despite months of highly public calls for a popular uprising, which have been amplified by US media, Venezuelans have remained loyal to the government or at least indifferent to Guaido’s calls for rebellion.

The distinct lack of anti-government traction is easily understood in the light of Pompeo’s recent admissions. That’s because there is no opposition movement with a popular mandate. It is a figment of Washington’s machinations for regime change.

Pompeo also admitted in the recorded comments that US efforts to galvanize a credible opposition have been going on before Maduro’s re-election last May and way before Guaido declared himself “interim president” earlier this year.

“We were trying to support various religious… institutions to get the opposition to come together… since the day I became CIA director, this was something that was at the center of what President Trump was trying to do”.

Pompeo was made CIA chief in January 2017, then later became Secretary of State in April 2018. Maduro was re-elected in May 2018 with nearly 68 percent of the national vote, much more than any rival candidate achieved. The so-called US-backed opposition didn’t even contest in the election, boycotting it.

It has long been suspected that Washington has been fomenting political unrest in Venezuela over the past 20 years, in order to oust the former socialist President Hugo Chavez, and subsequently his successor Maduro.

But Pompeo’s remarks confirm that the so-called “interim presidency” of Guaido is merely a product of Washington’s scheming. Washington is not rallying behind a genuine, spontaneous opposition figure. Rather, it has manufactured this cut-out, non-entity figure. The problem is that petty rivalries and lack of a popular support base have confounded the US manufacturing process for orchestrating a successful coup.

Several damning conclusions can be drawn.

The Trump administration’s high-flown claims that President Maduro is not the legitimate authority are baseless. Maduro was re-elected in a free and fair national vote by a clear majority. There are no grounds for Washington to claim that he does not have a popular mandate and is suppressing a democratic majority.

The economic sanctions imposed on Venezuela by Washington allegedly to support democracy are null and void of any legal or moral justification. In fact, the social turmoil and human suffering among the poor majority of Venezuelans caused by US sanctions make Washington fully culpable of criminal aggression towards that nation.

Threats by the Trump administration of using military force against Venezuela also constitute criminal aggression. The pretext of “military option” to “support democracy” is shown to be an utter lie. It would also be wantonly disastrous for Venezuela and the entire Latin American region, as President Putin warned.

Obviously, the real objective for Washington’s criminal policy of destabilizing and starving Venezuela is to impose a puppet regime in Caracas in order to exploit the South American country’s rich oil resources – estimated to be the largest reserves on the planet. Trump’s hawkish national security adviser John Bolton has previously declared this objective. Pompeo’s admission of an illusory, non-existent pro-democracy movement confirms the real agenda of American aggression.

Opposition figures, more accurately “figurines”, like Juan Guaido are liable for prosecution for sedition and treason.

A further conclusion is that all governments which ceded to Washington’s bullying interference in Venezuela, including notable European ones like Britain, France, and Germany, should be hanging their heads in shame. They are complicit in unlawful aggression and a gross violation of the UN Charter.

Ironically, the US, Britain, and France are permanent members of the UN Security Council. As Venezuela illustrates, they are nothing but a gang of criminals masquerading behind moralistic masks.

________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on Hot Mic: Pompeo Blabs That US Was Behind Failed Venezuela Coup

THIS IS CHILD ABUSE!

Whereas children of this age would have been innocently romping around the playground, jumping rope, playing dodgeball, and climbing across the monkey bars 50 years ago, 10-year-olds today are reportedly now being taught at public school how to engage in sodomy, use condoms, and play with sex toys.

This, according to a former public school teacher-turned-whistleblower who says that the new “education standards” in the Golden State are so beyond the point of depraved that most parents, if they really knew the truth, would be marching on these indoctrination centers with pitchforks in hand.

“It’s shocking,” says Rebecca Friedrichs, founder of the group For Kids & Country, about the unspeakable evils taking place in California’s public middle schools.

“It is medically risky on multiple levels,” she says about curriculum that involves having 10-year-old girls put condoms on “prosthetic male erections” while 10-year-old boys watch, or having 10-year-olds of both sexes practice engaging in oral and anal sex.

“And when you read the curriculum,” she says further, “it’s written almost like a college fraternity wrote this curriculum in a very crass and a juvenile way.”

For more news about the perversion that passes for “education” in American public schools in 2019, be sure to check out CampusInsanity.com.

The evil being taught to public school students is so depraved that it can’t even be talked about on public airways

When giving public interviews, Friedrichs, a conservative activist who’s been actively involved in fighting this type of indoctrination and brainwashing of innocent young children for nearly 30 years, says that she often can’t even discuss what’s going on because it’s too extreme for public airways.

“I always tell people that the scary thing is, I’ll give radio interviews and I can’t even say on the radio things that are being taught in our elementary and middle school classrooms in mixed company,” Friedrichs says.

“There’s something very wrong there.”

In addition to being taught all sorts of perverse sexual acts, these same 10-year-old children are also being given lessons in how to become transgenders and other “colors” on the LGBTQP “rainbow,” a form of brainwashing that’s actually been shown to increase the risk of exposed children developing mental illness or attempting suicide later on in their lives.

[Any society that rejects God’s law becomes, by default, INSANE. -ed.]

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on THIS IS CHILD ABUSE!

More Evidence US Armed Syria Terrorists as Trump Pleads Ceasefire

Remember when Donald Trump was running for president back in 2016, and he bragged he would “bomb the hell out of” terrorists in Syria. Now, in a reversal, Trump is calling on Syrian and allied Russian forces to stop bombing Idlib, the last redoubt of terror groups in Syria.

Trump urged Syria, Russia and Iran to “stop bombing the hell out of Idlib” claiming that civilians were being indiscriminately killed in the offensive to retake the renegade northwest province.

It seems like a strange plea from the American president. Idlib is unquestionably a stronghold for internationally proscribed terror groups, mainly Jabhat al Nusra (rebranded as Hayat Tahrir al Sham). Syrian government forces backed by Russian air power say it is their sovereign right to rout the militants, who have reportedly broken ceasefire agreements to launch attacks on civilian areas in government-controlled areas, as well as on the Russian air base at Hmeimim.

Moscow rejected Trump’s characterization of indiscriminate killing of civilians, saying that its operations along with Syrian forces are being directed at defeating illegally armed militants.

Moreover, the offensive to retake Idlib comes as new evidence emerges of the massive – albeit covert – international military support given to the various terror groups during Syria’s nearly eight-year war. Syrian state media this week reported arsenals of weaponry recently recovered in Damascus countryside and further south in the Daraa area.

The arsenals included rows and rows of heavy machine-guns, sniper rifles and US-made TOW missiles. Much of the weaponry was also of Israeli-origin, according to reports.

A separate find showed tonnes of C-4 plastic explosive, which Syrian military intelligence said was “US-made”. Up to four tonnes (4,000 kgs) were recovered this time around. Half a kilo of this lethal material is enough to kill several people.

This is not, of course, the first time that such huge caches of US, Israeli and NATO-origin weaponry have been recovered from territory formerly held by terrorists in Syria. There have been numerous such finds, which also included industrial chemicals made in Germany and Saudi Arabia, capable of producing sarin and other highly toxic munitions. That implies military-grade logistics and technical knowhow.

Taken together, the unavoidable conclusion is that internationally proscribed terrorist groups have been systematically weaponized by the US, its NATO allies, Israel and the Arab regimes of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The array of weaponry indicates international and state-level organization, not haphazard procurement from disparate private arms dealers.

A plausible configuration for how the weapons into Syria were delivered and paid for is the following: most likely through smuggling routes from Turkey, Jordan and Israel. The oil-rich Arab monarchs would have footed the bill. The American CIA and Britain’s MI6 managed the logistics and weapons handling. The circuitous supply chain was sufficiently obscure to avoid oversight by the US Congress and European parliaments. But the bottomline is that terrorist organizations were evidently weaponized by Washington and its allies for the objective of regime change in Damascus.

That is why President Trump and other Western leaders do not have any moral authority whatsoever when they make belated calls for a ceasefire in Idlib province.

Syria has faced an international criminal conspiracy to destroy its nation. Washington and other NATO states have been fully complicit in directing that conspiracy by arming terror groups to the teeth. Western corporate news media have served as propaganda cover for the entire criminal enterprise, lionizing the terrorists as “rebels”, and continually demonizing the Syrian army and its allies in their efforts to liberate the country from the foreign-sponsored scourge. Recall the disgraceful Western media distortion over the liberation of Aleppo by the Syrian army and Russia in 2016-2017, endeavoring to portray that defeat of besieging terror groups as a “massacre”. The Western media never followed up their hysterical charade with subsequent reports of how Aleppo citizens actually rejoiced in their liberation from Western-backed “rebels”.

The infernal problem of conflict and violence in Syria is the direct consequence of Western states embarking on a criminal scheme years before the war started in 2011 in order to overthrow the government of President Bashar al Assad.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/06/09/more-evidence-us-armed-syria-terrorists-as-trump-pleads-ceasefire/

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on More Evidence US Armed Syria Terrorists as Trump Pleads Ceasefire

Manufacturing War With Russia

[The US Government continues to push Russia more and more toward war. It is said that the first victim of war is the truth. Well, apparently by the time war starts the truth is already nearly dead due to all the propaganda from government to facilitate their lead up to war. The thousands of bald-faced lies coming from Washington about other nations and leaders is mind boggling. I must conclude that honestly simply doesn’t exist among politicians and mainstream news media. -ed.]

Chris HEDGES – 6-5-2019

Despite the Robert Mueller report’s conclusion that Donald Trump and his campaign did not collude with Russia during the 2016 presidential race, the new Cold War with Moscow shows little sign of abating. It is used to justify the expansion of NATO to Russia’s borders, a move that has made billions in profits for U.S. arms manufacturers. It is used to demonize domestic critics and alternative media outlets as agents of a foreign power. It is used to justify both the curtailment of civil liberties in the United States and U.S. interventions overseas—including in countries such as Syria and Venezuela.

This new Cold War predates the Trump presidential campaign. It was manufactured over a decade ago by a war industry and intelligence community that understood that by fueling a conflict with Russia they could consolidate their power and increase their profits. (Seventy percent of intelligence is carried out by private corporations such as Booz Allen Hamilton, which has been called the world’s most profitable spy operation.)

“This began long before Trump and ‘Russiagate,’ ” Stephen F. Cohen said when I interviewed him for my television show, “On Contact.” Cohen is professor emeritus of politics at Princeton University, where he was the director of the Russian studies program, and professor emeritus of Russian studies and history at New York University. “You have to ask yourself, why is it that Washington had no problem doing productive diplomacy with Soviet communist leaders. Remember Richard Nixon and Leonid Brezhnev? It was a love fest. They went hunting together [in the Soviet Union]. Yet along comes a post-Soviet leader, Vladimir Putin, who is not only not a communist but a professed anti-communist. Washington has been hating him ever since 2003, 2004. It requires some explanation. Why do we like communist leaders in Russia better than we like Russia’s anti-communist leader? It’s a riddle.”

“If you’re trying to explain why the Washington establishment has dealt with Putin in a hateful and demonizing way, you have to go back to the 1990s before Putin,” said Cohen, whose new book is “War With Russia? From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate.” The first post-Soviet leader is Boris Yeltsin. Clinton is president. And they have this fake, pseudo-partnership and friendship, whereas essentially the Clinton administration took advantage of the fact that Russia was in collapse. I lived there in the ’90s. Middle-class people lost their professions. Elderly people lost their pensions. I think it’s correct to say that industrial production fell more in the Russian 1990s than it did during our own Great Depression. It was the worst economic and social depression ever in peacetime. It was a catastrophe for Russia.”

In September 1993 Russians took to the streets to protest the collapse of the economy—the gross domestic product had fallen by 50% and the country was convulsed by hyperinflation—along with the rampant corruption that saw state enterprises sold for paltry fees to Russian oligarchs and foreign corporations in exchange for lavish kickbacks and bribes; food and fuel shortages; the nonpayment of wages and pensions; the lack of basic services, including medical services; falling life expectancy; the explosion of violent crime; and Yeltsin’s increasing authoritarianism and his unpopular war with Chechnya.

Yeltsin, in October 1993, after dissolving the parliament, ordered army tanks to shell the Russian parliament building, which was being occupied by democratic protesters. The assault left 2,000 dead. Yet during his presidency Yeltsin was effusively praised and supported by Washington. No outcry from Washington that he was killing his own Russian citizens.This included U.S. support for a $10.2 billion International Monetary Fund loan to Russia during his 1996 re-election campaign. The loan enabled the Yeltsin government to pay huge sums in back wages and pensions to millions of Russians, with checks often arriving on the eve of the election. Also, an estimated $1.5 billion from the loan was used to directly fund the Yeltsin presidential campaign. But by the time Yeltsin was forced out of office in December 1999 his approval rating had sunk to 2%. Washington, losing Yeltsin, went in search of another malleable Russian leader and, at first, thought it had found one in Putin.

“Putin went to Texas,” Cohen said. “He had a barbecue with Bush. Bush said he ‘looked into his eyes and saw a good soul.’ There was this honeymoon. But in time they turned against Putin. He turned out not to be another Yeltsin. We have a very interesting comment about this from Nicholas Kristof, the New York Times columnist, who wrote, I think in 2003, that his own disillusion with Putin was that he had turned out not to be ‘a sober Yeltsin.’ What Washington was hoping for was a submissive, supplicant, post-Soviet Russian leader, but one who was younger, healthier and not a drinker. They thought they had that in Putin. Yeltsin had put Putin in power, or at least the people around Yeltsin did.”

“When Putin began talking about Russia’s sovereignty, Russia’s independent course in world affairs, they were aghast,” Cohen said of the Washington elites. “This was not what they expected. Since then, my own thinking is we were pretty lucky after the 1990s to get Putin because there were worst contenders in the wings. I knew some of them. I don’t want to name names. But some of these guys were really harsh people. Putin was kind of the right person for the right time, both for Russia and for Russian world affairs.”

“We have now had three years of this,” Cohen said of Russiagate. “We lost sight of the essence of what this allegation is. The people who created Russiagate are literally saying, and have been for almost three years, that the president of the United States is a Russian agent, or he has been compromised by the Kremlin. We grin because it’s so fantastic. But the Washington establishment, mainly the Democrats but not only them, have taken this seriously.”

“I don’t know if there has ever been anything like this in American history,” Cohen said. “That accusation does such damage to our own institutions, to the presidency, to our electoral system, to Congress, to the American mainstream media, not to mention the damage it’s done to American-Russian relations, the damage it has done to the way Russians, both elite Russians and young Russians, look at America today. This whole Russiagate has not only been fraudulent, it’s been a catastrophe.”

“There were three major episodes of détente in the 20th century,” Cohen said. “The first was after Stalin died, when the Cold War was very dangerous. That was carried out by Dwight Eisenhower, a Republican president. The second was by Richard Nixon, advised by Henry Kissinger—it was called ‘the Nixon détente with Brezhnev.’ The third, and we thought most successful, was Ronald Reagan with Mikhail Gorbachev. It was such a successful détente Reagan and Gorbachev, and Reagan’s successor, the first Bush, said the Cold War was over forever.”

“The wall had come down,” Cohen said of the 1989 collapse of East Germany and the fall of the Berlin Wall. “Germany was reunifying. The question became ‘where would a united Germany be?’ The West wanted Germany in NATO. For Gorbachev, this was an impossible sell. Twenty-seven point five million Soviet citizens had died in the war against Germany in the Second World War on the eastern front. Contrary to the bunk we’re told, the United States landing on Normandy was not what defeated Nazi Germany. The defeat of Nazi Germany was done primarily by the Soviet army. How could Gorbachev go home and say, ‘Germany is reunited. Great. And it’s going to be in NATO.’ It was impossible. They told Gorbachev, ‘We promise if you agree to a reunited Germany in NATO, NATO will not move one inch to the east (this was promised by Secretary of State James Baker.) In other words, NATO would not move from Germany toward Russia.”

But it did!

“As we speak today, NATO is on Russia’s borders,” Cohen said. “From the Baltics to Ukraine to the former Soviet Republic of Georgia. So, what happened? Later, they said Gorbachev lied or he misunderstood. [That] the promise was never made. But the National Security Archive in Washington has produced all the documents of the discussion in 1990. It was not only [President George H.W.] Bush, it was the French leader François Mitterrand, it was Margaret Thatcher of England. Every Western leader promised Gorbachev NATO would not move eastward.”

“What do you end up with today?” he asked. “Betrayal. Any kind of discussion about Russian-American relations today, an informed Russian is going to say, ‘We worry you will betray us again.’… Putin said he had illusions about the West when he came to power.”

“Trump comes out of nowhere in 2016 and says, ‘I think we should cooperate with Russia,’ ” Cohen said. “This is a statement of détente. It’s what drew my attention to him. It’s then that this talk of Trump being an agent of the Kremlin begins. One has to wonder—I can’t prove it—but you have to think logically. Was this [allegation] begun somewhere high up in America by people who didn’t want a pro-détente president? And [they] thought that Trump, however unlikely it seemed at the time that he could win—they really didn’t like this talk of cooperation with Russia. It set in motion these things we call Russiagate.”

“The forefathers of détente were Republicans,” Cohen said. “How the Democrats behaved during this period of détente was mixed. There was what used to be called the Henry Jackson wing. This was a very hard-line, ideological wing of the Democratic Party that didn’t believe in détente. Some Democrats did. I lived many years in Moscow, both Soviet and post-Soviet times. If you talk to Russian Soviet policymakers, they generally prefer Republican candidates for the presidency.”

Democrats are perceived by Russian rulers as more ideological, Cohen said.

“Republicans tend to be businessmen who want to do business in Russia,” he said. “The most important pro-détente lobby group, created in the 1970s, was called the American Committee for East-West Accord. It was created by American CEOs who wanted to do business in Soviet Russia.”

“The single most important relationship the United States has is with Russia,” Cohen went on, “not only because of the nuclear weapons. It remains the largest territorial country in the world. It abuts every region we are concerned about. Détente with Russia—not friendship, not partnership, not alliance—but reducing conflict is essential. Yet something happened in 2016.”

The accusations made repeatedly by James Clapper, the former director of the National Security Agency, and John Brennan, the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, concerning the Kremlin’s supposed control of Trump and Russia’s alleged theft of our elections are deeply disturbing, Cohen said. Clapper and Brennan have described Trump as a Kremlin “asset.” Brennan called Trump’s performance at a news conference with the Russian president in Finland “nothing short of treasonous.”

Clapper in his memoir, “Facts and Fears: Hard Truths From a Life in Intelligence,” claims Putin’s interference in the 2016 presidential election on behalf of Trump was “staggering.”

“Of course, the Russian efforts affected the outcome,” writes Clapper. “Surprising even themselves, they swung the election to a Trump win. To conclude otherwise stretches logic, common sense and credulity to the breaking point. Less than eighty thousand votes in three key states swung the election. I have no doubt that more votes than that were influenced by this massive effort by the Russians.”

Brennan and Clapper have on numerous occasions been caught lying to the public. Brennan, for example, denied, falsely, that the CIA was monitoring the computers that Senate staff members were using to prepare a report on torture. The chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein, took to the Senate floor to accuse Brennan and the CIA of potentially violating the U.S. Constitution and of criminal activity in its attempts to spy on and thwart her committee’s investigations into the agency’s use of torture. She described the situation as a “defining moment” for political oversight. Brennan also claimed there was not a “single collateral death” in the drone assassination program, that Osama bin Laden used his wife as a human shield before being gunned down in a U.S. raid in Pakistan, and insisted that torture, or what is euphemistically called “enhanced interrogation,” has produced valuable intelligence. None of these statements are true.

Clapper, who at the time of the U.S. invasion of Iraq was the head of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon unit responsible for interpreting spy-satellite photos and intelligence such as air particles and soil samples, concocted a story about Saddam Hussein spiriting to Syria his nonexistent weapons of mass destruction and the documents that verified his program on the eve of the invasion. He blatantly committed perjury before the Senate when being questioned about domestic surveillance programs of the American public. He was asked, “Does the NSA [National Security Agency] collect any type of data at all on millions, or hundreds of millions of Americans?” Clapper responded, “No, sir. … Not wittingly.” It was, as Clapper knew very well, a lie.

“We have the Steele dossier that was spookily floating around American media,” Cohen said of the report compiled by Christopher Steele.

The report was commissioned by Fusion GPS and paid for by the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Bob Woodward reported that Brennan pushed to include the Steele dossier in the intelligence community assessment of Russian election interference.

“He [Steele] got it from newspapers,” Cohen said. “I don’t think he had a single source in Russia. Steele comes forward with this dossier and says, ‘I’ve got information from high-level sources.’ The Clinton campaign is funding this operation. But Steele is very important. He’s a former U.K. intelligence officer who had served in Russia and ran Russian cases. He says he has this information in the dossier about Trump.”

“The theory is Putin desperately wanted to make Trump president,” Cohen said. “Yet, guys in the Kremlin, around Putin, were feeding dirt about Trump to a guy called Steele. Does it make any sense to you?”

“Why is this important?” Cohen asked. “Right-wing American media outlets today, in particularly Fox News, are blaming Russia for this whole Russiagate thing. They’re saying that Russia provided this false information to Steele, who pumped it into our system, which led to Russiagate. This is untrue.”

“Who is behind all this? Including the Steele operation?” Cohen asked. “All the surface information suggests that this originated with Brennan and the CIA. Long before it hit America—maybe as early as late 2015. One of the problems we have today is everybody is hitting on the FBI. Lovers who sent emails. But the FBI is a squishy organization, nobody is afraid of the FBI. It’s not what it used to be under J. Edgar Hoover. Look at James Comey, for God’s sake. He’s a patsy. Brennan and Clapper played Comey. They dumped this stuff on him. Comey couldn’t even handle Mrs. Clinton’s emails. He made a mess of everything. Who were the cunning guys? They were Brennan and Clapper. [Brennan,] the head of the CIA. Clapper, the head of the Office of [the Director of] National Intelligence, who is supposed to oversee these agencies.”

“Is there any reality to these Russiagate allegations about Trump and Putin?” he asked. “Or was this dreamed up by our intelligence services? Today investigations are being promised, including by the attorney general of the United States. They all want to investigate the FBI. But they need to investigate what Brennan and the CIA did. This is the worst scandal in American history. It’s the worst, at least since the Civil War. We need to know how this began. If our intelligence services are way off the reservation, to the point that they can try to first destroy a presidential candidate and then a president, and I don’t care that it’s Trump, it may be Harry Smith next time, or a woman; if they can do this, we need to know it.”

“The second Bush left the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002,” Cohen said. “It was a very important treaty. It prevented the deployment of missile defense. If anybody got missile defense that worked, they might think they had a first strike [option]. Russia or the United States could strike the other without retaliation. Once Bush left the treaty, we began to deploy missile defense around Russia. It was very dangerous.”

“The Russians began a new missile program which we learned about last year,” he said. Hypersonic missiles. Russia now has nuclear missiles that can evade and elude any missile defense system. We are in a new and more perilous point in a 50-year nuclear arms race. Putin says, ‘We’ve developed these because of what you did. We can destroy each other.’ Now is the time for a serious, new arms control agreement. What do we get? Russiagate. Russiagate is one of the greatest threats to national security. I have five listed in the book. Russia and China aren’t on there. Russiagate is number one.”

________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on Manufacturing War With Russia

Snowden: “Most Effective Means Of Social Control In The History Of Our Species” Now In Place

 

Andrea Germanos – 6/1/2019

NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden said Thursday that people in systems of power have exploited the human desire to connect in order to create systems of mass surveillance.

Snowden appeared at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia via livestream from Moscow to give a keynote address for the Canadian university’s Open Dialogue Series.

Right now, he said, humanity is in a sort of “atomic moment” in the field of computer science. “We’re in the midst of the greatest redistribution of power since the Industrial Revolution, and this is happening because technology has provided a new capability,” Snowden said.

“It’s related to influence that reaches everyone in every place,” he said. “It has no regard for borders. Its reach is unlimited, if you will, but its safeguards are not.” Without such defenses, technology is able to affect human behavior.

Institutions can “monitor and record private activities of people on a scale that’s broad enough that we can say it’s close to all-powerful,” said Snowden. They do this through “new platforms and algorithms,” through which “they’re able to shift our behavior. In some cases they’re able to predict our decisions—and also nudge them—to different outcomes. And they do this by exploiting the human need for belonging.”

“We don’t sign up for this,” he added, dismissing the notion that people know exactly what they are getting into with social media platforms like Facebook.

“How many of you who have a Facebook account actually read the terms of service?” Snowden asked. “Everything has hundreds and hundreds of pages of legal jargon that we’re not qualified to read and assess—and yet they’re considered to be binding upon us.”

“It is through this sort of unholy connection of technology and sort of an unusual interpretation of contract law,” he continued, “that these institutions have been able to transform this greatest virtue of humanity—which is this desire to interact and to connect and to cooperate and to share—to transform all of that into a weakness.”

“And now,” he added, “these institutions, which are both commercial and governmental, have built upon that and… have structuralized that and entrenched it to where it has become now the most effective means of social control in the history of our species.

“Maybe you’ve heard about it,” Snowden said. “This is mass surveillance.”

_________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on Snowden: “Most Effective Means Of Social Control In The History Of Our Species” Now In Place

United States is a Warmongering Nation

By Finian Cunningham

June 02, 2019 “Information Clearing House” – In an address to West Point military graduates, US Vice President Mike Pence told them they will one day fight for America. “It’s a virtual certainty,” said Pence who was swelling with pride as he spoke, rather than lamenting.

Well, at least, he is being candid. The United States is a warmongering nation, there is no doubt about it. As several historical studies attest, out of the 243 years since its formation as a modern state, the US has been at war during every decade, sometimes in multiple simultaneous wars.

Or put another way, about 95 per cent of its historical existence the US has been involved in waging wars, sometimes covertly or by proxy. Since the Second World War alone, the US has been involved in up to 60 wars or covert conflicts, inflicting a civilian death toll estimated at 20 million. Arguably, there is not another nation, past or present, with such a record of belligerence.

So, yes, Pence is correct when he told graduates from the US’ elite military academy: “It is a virtual certainty that you will be on a battlefield for America.”

Ironically, the vice president, like President Trump and the hawkish national security adviser John Bolton, has never served in the military. Yet Pence held forth like a four-star (armchair) general about the need for young American troops to do battle in a “dangerous world”.

“I know when that day comes you will move to the sound of guns,” exhorted Pence, whose only experience of gunfire no doubt comes from watching replays of old Hollywood war movies.

The whole world is a potential battlefield in Pence’s reckoning. (Not just Pence, but nearly all American politicians.) He specifically mentioned US troops going into future conflict with China or North Korea. He also said they may be deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq where US forces have been embroiled for nearly two decades.

Ominously, Pence warned the new cohort of West Point Second Lieutenants that they may one day be dispatched to a war in “this hemisphere”. Given the Trump administration’s backing for a coup in Venezuela and its threats of military intervention, was Pence alluding to a possible war in the works with that South American country, which, by the way, happens to possess the biggest-known oil reserves on the planet?

The exulting in future wars by Pence comes at a time of escalating military threats from the US towards Iran. The Trump administration has sent an aircraft carrier strike group to the Persian Gulf as well as new missile batteries, nuclear-capable B-52 bombers and more squadrons of F-16 fighter jets. Trump also last week commanded 1,500 more troops to the region to join an already 70,000 stationed there, all in a bid to ostensibly “counter Iranian aggression”.

The global context of American military deployment, as Pence sanguinely acknowledges, belies the claims made by Washington of it allegedly facing “Iranian aggression”. What’s going on in the Persian Gulf is just one sequence in a whole global series of relentless US militarism. It is estimated that the US has 800 military bases around the planet with its forces deployed in at least 70 countries. The idea that this imperialist configuration is because the US is “the leader of the free world” is a risible propaganda rationale.

American military power is used to project and protect US capitalist interests. US troops are just hired guns and cannon fodder for corporate profit-making, as former Marine general Smedley Butler scathingly confessed during the 1930s in his classic book ‘War is a Racket’.

When Pence said: “It is a virtual certainty that you will be on a battlefield for America.” What he really meant to say was… “for American merchants and bankers”.

US soldiers are sent to wars not to defend American national security or to “promote democracy”, as the myth goes. They are sent to foreign lands to kill, die or be maimed for the sole, sordid purpose of making money for elite bankers, corporate executives or rich shareholders who send their non-serving scions to fancy private colleges like Pence and Trump went to.

The American ruling class perpetuates itself by sending working-class schmucks into wars-for-capitalist-profit, over and over again.

The unremitting warmongering that underpins American capitalism is testified by Pence’s address to the West Point graduates. Stripped from the pious rhetoric, Pence was telling like it is: the American way is war, war, and more war. The American way is Total War on the planet to get whatever US corporations need in order to make the oligarchic class even richer.

Even when the US is purportedly engaged in “diplomacy” it is always ready to exercise the “all options” of militarism in order to get its infernal way.

Pence referred to US troops one day going to the Korean Peninsula because, he asserted, North Korea is “a threat to peace”. A country where the American military killed three million people during the 1950-53 Korean War. He warned there could be another war against North Korea or China. Partly because China, he said, was “challenging American power”. That’s acceptable cause for war?

It is quite astounding that the American vice president is envisioning a war with two countries that his administration is supposedly engaging with in ongoing diplomatic negotiations. The Trump administration is trying to convince North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons, while the US makes more nukes.

________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on United States is a Warmongering Nation

What diplomacy? Here are 36 countries the US has bullied this week

What diplomacy? Here are 36 countries the US has bullied this week

 

It’s been a busy few days for “American diplomacy” with three dozen nations ending up at the receiving end of threats, ultimatums and sanctions this week alone. (Their crime? Refusing to get on board with Trump’s war on Iran and Venezuela, or trading with Russia and China -ed).

Mexico is the latest target, slapped with 5 percent tariffs on each and every export, gradually increasing to 25 percent until it stops the flow of Latin American migrants into the US, thus fulfilling one of President Donald Trump’s election promises. Most of those migrants aren’t even from Mexico.

On the other side of the world, India is reportedly about to be forced to face a choice: ditch the purchase of Russian S-400 air defense systems or face sanctions under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA, Washington’s go-to cooperation enforcement instrument).

Turkey is facing a similar ultimatum: abandon S-400s (something Ankara has repeatedly refused to do) or lose access to the F-35 fighter jet program. This threat was repeated on Thursday by Kathryn Wheelbarger, US acting assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs. Ankara has already invested some $1.25 billion into the super-expensive American fighter, but with a lot of its parts being made in Turkey, it’s still an open question who would be the bigger loser.

The entire European Union could be facing punishment if it tries to trade with Iran using its non-dollar humanitarian mechanism to bypass the American embargo. Having worked hard on the 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran, which has repeatedly been confirmed to be working, EU member states are not ready to ditch trade at Trump’s whim – and US Special Representative to Iran Brian Hook on Thursday reaffirmed the threat of CAATSA sanctions.

Also on rt.com US to punish anyone using EU’s alternative payment system with Iran to skirt sanctions

Cuba, the rediscovered scapegoat of the Trump administration’s war drive, is being called out for supporting Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. On his Thursday visit to Canada, US Vice President Mike Pence said Ottawa must stop Havana’s “malign influence” on Caracas’ affairs – despite Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s meek objections that it could play a “positive role” in settling the crisis there.

That’s 32 countries bullied, threatened or sanctioned in one day (counting the 28 EU members). Years’ worth of gunboat diplomacy, packed into a busy few hours in Trump’s signature “my way or the highway” style.

Mentioning Iran (which was almost certainly behind a recent inept attack on oil tankers near the Persian Gulf), China (which dares to buy Iranian oil), Russia (which has probably restarted low-yield nuclear tests) and Venezuela (where the ouster of its elected president is the only result of long-awaited talks with the opposition that Washington will accept) – is almost an afterthought. There’s hardly a week passing without the Trump administration churning out half-a-dozen accusations and threats against one or all of those – and this week, the gears were grinding as hard as ever.

Here’s a visual aid: the nations the US has threatened this week, colored on a map.

American influence, built up over decades, is undeniable: even its adversaries depend on the US dollar and are arguably at the mercy of US military bases scattered all over the globe. Trump and his hawkish inner circle have been more than willing to spend that credit by shouting at everyone to get in line.

In the worst-case scenario, he is dragging the world into devastating wars. In the best case, he is throwing that influence away, showing allies and rivals alike that an ugly divorce could be the only way out of this abusive relationship.

__________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on What diplomacy? Here are 36 countries the US has bullied this week

US State Dept’s Grants $75mn to “help Syria combat Iranian disinformation”

US State Dept’s $75mn grant will help war-torn Syria… combat ‘Iranian disinformation’

After spending years trying to topple Damascus, Washington has now pledged to protect war-scarred Syrians from Iranian “disinformation.” The act of altruism is part of a grant aimed at “advancing US interests” in the country.

The US State Department wants to give $75 million to an eligible NGO as part of an initiative aimed at strengthening “credible governance and civil society entities” in Syria – at least in the areas controlled by illegitimate, US-backed forces.

The grant will also fund efforts to “counter extremism and disinformation perpetuated by Iranian forces,” since that is apparently the major life-and-death issue facing Syrians after seven years of devastating war. Additionally, the grant aims to “ensure the enduring defeat” of Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL).

How the grant will help bring about a peaceful political solution in Syria is also an open question. Washington’s long-standing policy has been that President Bashar Assad “must go” – which sounds more like an act of war, and less like a peaceful settlement.

This may all sound like a profound waste of taxpayer dollars, but the grant synopsis makes it very clear that approved applicants will be nobly advancing “US government policy objectives in Syria.”

While the grant lists stringent requirements for all interested bidders, applicants are not required to obtain permission from Damascus to operate in Syrian territory, cutting out a lot of annoying bureaucratic red tape. Instead, the lucky grant winners will “strengthen government” in territories occupied by Israeli, Saudi, and Washington-backed proxy forces, like ISIS and al-Qaeda.

With thousands killed and millions displaced from the fighting in Syria, one might think the US government could find a better use of $75 million in Syria, other than trying to overthrow the country’s popular president, Bashar Assad, who is voted in and backed by the Syrian people.

[Washington has strange ways of “helping to rebuild” Syria – by terrorizing and attacking them, blaming it on Iran, then claiming to help defend them from Iran. Are you kidding? -ed]

__________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on US State Dept’s Grants $75mn to “help Syria combat Iranian disinformation”

“We’re Being Played”: Tucker Carlson Interviews Tulsi Gabbard about Leaked Syria Chemical Attack Memo

On Thursday night Fox’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight” featured rare prime time coverage of the bombshell leaked OPCW report which refuted key events surrounding the April 2018 alleged chemical gas attack in Douma, Syria — which resulted in massive US and allied airstrikes on Damascus, nearly leading to a major war at the time. And now new allegations are looming which could once again lead to US airstrikes on Syria.

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is the international chemical weapons watchdog group which has worked in tandem with the UN to investigation claimed Sarin and chlorine gas attack sites in Syria. The smoking gun document, Tucker said in opening remarks, vindicates his and others’ past skepticism. He said:

“Now a leaked document shows there was good reason to be skeptical.” 

But here we are again — one year later — with yet another chemical attack claim near Idlib on Sunday, which the US State Department says it is investigating, vowing to “respond quickly and appropriately” if Assad is found guilty of using the banned weapons, according to an official statement.

But crucially, as Tucker Carlson pointed out on his show Thursday evening in reference last year’s Douma events, “At the time that happened this program was pretty much the only show on mainstream television to show any skepticism about the official narrative of the attack.”

Introducing a segment with Democratic presidential contender Tulsi Gabbard, a known longtime skeptic on Syrian regime change, Carlson reviewed the prior two American attacks on the Syrian government, noting “Justification for both attacks was an alleged aerial chemical weapons attack on anti-Assad rebels in Douma, Syria.”

Congresswomen Gabbard told the Fox host during the interview that the leaked document presents major reasons to doubt the official narrative concerning both Douma and the most recent claims out of Idlib being advanced by the al-Qaeda groups Hay’at Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS) and the Turkestan Islamic Party (TIP). She said she is reaching out to both the UN and OPCW for answers.

Referencing current and past Syria chemical attack claims, Tucker agreed that, “I’m beginning to suspect that we’re being played here.”

The document, whose authenticity the OPCW has confirmed, contends that the official story which was used to justify an air strike by the US, UK and France about poison gas being dropped on civilians from Syrian government helicopters is scientifically implausible, saying “In summary, observations at the scene of the two locations, together with subsequent analysis, suggest that there is a higher probability that both cylinders were manually placed at those two locations rather than being delivered from aircraft.” — Establishment Narrative-Managers Struggling With New Syria Plot Holes

Since the leaked OPCW report surfaced over a week ago there’s predictably been mainstream silence, perhaps with the exception of two major UK outlets, The Independent and The Daily Mail.

Rocket scientist and MIT professor emeritus Theodore Postol has also weighed in to say the new evidence reveals the “attacks were staged”.

Writing for The Independent, world-renowned Middle East war correspondent Robert Fisk summarized the significance of the leaked report. This comes just as once again US war rhetoric against Damascus is looming.

Fisk wrote in his report:

The OPCW officially maintains that these canisters were probably dropped by an aircraft – probably a helicopter, presumably Syrian – over Douma on 7 April 2018. But it is a “higher probability that both cylinders were manually placed at those two locations rather than being delivered from aircraft”.

It is difficult to underestimate the seriousness of this manipulative act by the OPCW. In a response the OPCW admits that its so-called technical secretariat “is conducting an internal investigation about the unauthorised [sic] release of the document”.

Importantly, the OPCW has confirmed the authenticity of the report, authored by an expert that had spent most of his career as an on the ground technical investigator since the OPCW’s inception.

The leaked OPCW document can be accessed here.

Though there’s largely been a mainstream media blackout on the leaked document, it’s possible it could slowly trickle into media discourse following Fox’s prime time coverage on Tucker’s show.

Fisk further articulated that the document is a game-changer at the conclusion of his article, saying, “Put bluntly, the paper is suggesting that the location of the cylinders was a set-up, that someone inside Douma immediately after the bombings of 7 April 2018 placed the cylinders in the locations in which they were subsequently examined by the OPCW.”

With the potential for a new round of attacks by US forces against Assad based on fresh chemical attack claims out of Idlib, we wonder, did President Trump catch Tucker’s show on Thursday night?

_________________________________________

 

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on “We’re Being Played”: Tucker Carlson Interviews Tulsi Gabbard about Leaked Syria Chemical Attack Memo

The Jewish Pioneers of Sexual Degeneracy in 1920s Berlin

In 1919, Magnus Hirschfeld and Arthur Kronfeld, founded the “Institut für Sexualwissenschaft” (Institute for ‘Sexual Research’) in Berlin. Both were active in the German Communist Party and were prominent members of Berlin’s Jewish community.

A multitude of degenerate services were offered at the institute, including the first surgical sex changes in modern history, abortions, lectures and ‘sex counseling’, room rentals, a large library of pornography and erotic literature on every possible perversion (including bestiality and pedophilia), and a Museum of Sex featuring a wide array of homosexual fetish items, etc.

Hirschfield 4

The institute hosted tens of thousands of visitors each year, including school class field trips. Hirschfeld was a notorious sodomite, popularly known in the Berlin queer scene by his cross-dresser name Tante Magnesia.

He also founded a committee for “gay rights” and wrote and published many degenerate books and journals, including Jahrbuch für Sexuelle Zwischenstufen (Yearbook for Intermediate Sexual Types). In fact, he’s the sinister figure that coined the term ‘transvestite’.  Hirschfeld campaigned to end the Berlin police department’s arrest of cross-dressers and prostitutes.

Book Burning 1

In 1921, Hirschfeld organized the First Congress for Sexual Reform, which led to the formation of the World League for Sexual Reform, with conventions held in Copenhagen [1928], London [1929], Vienna [1930], and Brno [1932].

In short, Hirschfeld was the Jewish quintessential culture-killer who Adolf Hitler explained thus: “And in what mighty doses this poison was manufactured and distributed.  Naturally, the lower the moral and intellectual level of such an author the more inexhaustible his fecundity (creativeness).

magnus

“It was a terrible thought, and yet it could not be avoided, that the greater number of Jews seemed specially designed by Nature to play this shameful part.” Adolf Hitler referred to Hirschfeld as the most dangerous Jew in Germany.

Club

Hirschfeld’s institute was a monument to moral sickness and represented everything the NSDAP stood against. In May 1933, the Deutsche Studentenschaft (German Students Union) stormed this den of debauchery shouting Brenne Hirschfeld (Burn Hirschfeld) and began beating the staff and smashing the premises. The Institute was permanently closed and its extensive lists of names and addresses were seized.

ed667194563ea7d751f0e9d122f2796d-magnus-hirschfeld-p-orig

Li Shiu Tong* (李兆堂) and Magnus Hirschfeld

A few days later the entire library was famously burned in the streets, some 20,000 books and images, along with Marxist literature and other subversive material. Ever since, without background or explanation, corporate media and palace publishers have protested against the German students emptying their swamp.

At the time, Hirschfeld was on an international speaking tour lecturing on sexuality. He never returned to Germany and died in exile two years later. In October 1941, co-founder of the institute, Kronfeld, committed suicide in Moscow at the approach of German troops.

[In 20th-century America, the Hirschfeld group’s nefarious methods were taken up and enlarged upon by sexologists like Alfred Kinsey (the Kinsey Reports), and William Masters & Virginia Johnson (Masters & Johnson). Of course, Sigmund Freud contributed as well, teaching that people’s dreams and inclinations are driven by sexual impressions. Together, these and other promoters of filth and perversion have devastated American morality and sanity. – ed.]

________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on The Jewish Pioneers of Sexual Degeneracy in 1920s Berlin