Google Is Watching You

It is called “Surveillance Capitalism.” But selling products is only one aspect of the power of Google Surveillance. How about the total loss of privacy?

Unfortunately we live in a generation of people who don’t seem to care about privacy. That’s a shame, because if you don’t care about privacy then you don’t have any. Freedom requires privacy. No privacy equates to no freedom and a society where a tiny percentage of people have control over everyone else.

Is that what you want?

__________________________________________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on Google Is Watching You

What Next? US Bans All Russian Nukes?

 

Finian Cunningham – February 07, 2018

Provocatively and recklessly, the American Pentagon has recently accused Russia of threatening European allies with nuclear weapons. On the basis of this deplorable accusation, the US is embarking on a $1 trillion upgrade of its nuclear arsenal.

The American nuclear revamp not only puts it in potential violation of disarmament agreements; the move is also destabilizing nuclear forces and increases the risk of catastrophic global war.

If ever Washington’s reckless power politics were in doubt, this is surely the touchstone issue.

As with so many other allegations leveled by Washington against Russia – from election hacking to Olympic sports doping – the claim that Moscow is engaging in nuclear threats is far from evidenced. Indeed, one could say, it’s in the realm of fantasy.

But the insane claim is then used to justify Washington’s own reprehensible behavior.

In the Pentagon’s Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) published last week, US Defense Secretary James Mattis states in the document’s preface that “Russia’s seizure of Crimea and nuclear threats against our allies, mark Moscow’s decided return to Great Power competition.”

Mattis goes on to make other claims against Russia, including that it is in breach of arms controls treaties to reduce nuclear stockpiles. He also alleges that Moscow is using “non-strategic nuclear systems to provide a coercive advantage in crises and at lower levels of conflict,” and that Moscow is “lowering the threshold for first-use of nuclear weapons.”

At the same time, it was reported this week, even by US media, that Russia has fully complied with meeting its reduction targets for nuclear weapons prescribed by the 2010 New START accord.

In any case, the Pentagon’s anti-Russia accusations continue unabated. In particular, Washington claims that Russia has violated the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty by developing short-range land-launched cruise missiles. Moscow has denied any violation. Again, Washington does not present evidence to verify its claims.

Presumably, what Washington is referring to is the installation by Russia of Iskander ballistic missiles in its exclave territory of Kaliningrad adjacent to the Baltic states and Poland. This is also what the Pentagon appears to be referring to when it accuses Russia of “threatening our allies”.

Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite – a notorious Russophobe and ardent NATO cheerleader – recently said that the Russian Iskanders in Kaliningrad (range 500km) were threatening “half of Europe”.

But hold on a moment. Kaliningrad is Russian soil. As Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov pointed out, it is Russia’s sovereign right to position any of its forces anywhere on its own territory.

NATO’s warped logic has also been applied in the case of Russian military holding exercises on its Western flank. Last year, when Russia held its Zapad defense drills there were hysterical claims from NATO and the Western media that Moscow was about to invade the Baltic region.

Meanwhile, it goes without a hint of irony, that NATO has increasingly built up its forces and military maneuvers along Russia’s Western borders over the past decade and more. Yet, Washington and its allies get away – thanks to Western media servility – with the double-think that such force build-up on Russia’s borders is “defensive”; while any counter-move by Russia from within its territory is distorted as “outrageous” and “offensive”.

Getting back to the issue of nuclear weapons and allegations of Russia’s threat, the stark conclusion from Washington’s warped logic is that Moscow is not allowed to have any nuclear weapons.

Evidently, the US-led NATO military alliance is permitted to station warplanes, warships, troops and tanks on Russia’s borders, including anti-missile systems – all in violation of past agreements. But if Russia positions defensive systems on its own territory then it is behaving provocatively, illicitly, and threateningly. Which then on the basis of this absurd claim allows Washington to expand its nuclear forces against Russia – as the Pentagon is proposing to do in its latest Nuclear Posture Review.

Specifically, Washington is committing to a “more flexible use” of nuclear weapons, and the development of new submarine-launched cruise missiles, as well as so-called “low-yield” ballistic warheads.

Such a move will potentially bring the US into severe breach of non-proliferation and arms control treaties. That is, the very malign behavior that Washington is provocatively accusing Moscow of.

Truly, Washington’s logic is an amalgam of Orwellian and Dr Strangelove.

Furthermore, an extremely sinister change in the American nuclear doctrine is its call for explicitly using “nuclear deterrence” in a scenario of conventional military conflict or, what it dubiously deems to be “new forms of aggression” by adversaries.

This is a highly dangerous move by the Pentagon to lower the trigger for deploying nuclear weapons – and on the basis of its faulty, politicized perception about what constitutes “aggression.”

For example, the US has repeatedly accused Russia of “hybrid warfare” with regard to the conflict in Ukraine. Russia is accused of instigating that conflict, when in reality, it was Washington and Europe’s meddling in the internal affairs of that country, resulting in a neo-Nazi coup in Kiev in February 2014.

The United States has continually accused Russia of engaging in “asymmetric warfare” from “cyberattacks” and “election interference”. Such claims have never been substantiated, let alone verified – yet they have been raised to the alarmist level of allegedly constituting a “national security threat”.

The anti-Russia political climate being whipped up by Washington – from “Russiagate” to cyberattacks, from sports doping to nuclear aggression – has reached the level of hysterical insanity where Russia by merely having a military defense system is now being traduced as somehow behaving criminally and offensively.

However, parlaying this perverse logic, the US is moving to increase its nuclear threats against Russia – in contravention of international agreements and any objective reasoning.

Even US media outlets like the Washington Post and US-based scientists warned this week that the new nuclear posture was a disturbing drift towards catastrophic war.

American history professor Colin Cavell, commenting for this column, said that the hegemonic mentality of the US ruling class is such that no other powers are tolerated to have weapons, even if for self-defense purposes.

Said Cavell: “The US is a capitalist society. It is the preeminent imperialist power in the world today. As such, those who rule the US perceive that maintaining a class-divided society to be of paramount concern. Internationally, this translates into maintaining at least a two-tiered international system where the US is master and the rest of the world are its servants.  This will not change until capitalism is overthrown or destroys itself.”

This attitude of US rulers is ultimately tyrannical in their relations to the rest of the world. Ironically, American vice president Mike Pence this week accused North Korea of being “the most tyrannical and oppressive regime on the planet.”

With regard to Russia, the logic of the US is this: You are not allowed to have nuclear weapons, nor even a viable conventional defense system. We, on the other hand, are allowed to threaten you with increasing menace of nuclear annihilation until you do as we demand.

In short, supreme arrogance. But an arrogance that will bring its own downfall.

_______________________________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on What Next? US Bans All Russian Nukes?

Flu vaccine BOMBSHELL

630% more “aerosolized flu virus particles” emitted by people who received flu shots… flu vaccines actually SPREAD the flu.

A bombshell new scientific study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) finds that people who receive flu shots emit 630% more flu virus particles into the air, compared to non-vaccinated individuals. In effect, this finding documents evidence that flu vaccines spread the flu, and that so-called “herd immunity” is a medical hoax because “the herd” is actually transformed into carriers and spreaders of influenza.

The bombshell finding is documented in a study entitled Infectious virus in exhaled breath of symptomatic seasonal influenza cases from a college community. The study authors are Jing Yan, Michael Grantham, Jovan Pantelic, P. Jacob Bueno de Mesquita, Barbara Albert, Fengjie Liu, Sheryl Ehrman, Donald K. Milton and EMIT Consortium.

Details of this bombshell study have been revealed by Sayer Ji at Green Med Info, a site that’s rapidly becoming one of the world’s most authoritative sources on intelligent analysis of real science. Green Med Info has published 500 studies that document the adverse effects (and injury) of vaccines. Find that extensive list at this link.

630% more aerosolized flu virus particles shed by vaccinated individuals

The study, which examined 355 volunteers who were sick with flu-like symptoms, found that people who previously received flu shots emitted sharply higher quantities of flu virus particles that can infect other people. From the study:

Fine-aerosol viral RNA was also positively associated with having influenza vaccination for both the current and prior season… We provide overwhelming evidence that humans generate infectious aerosols and quantitative data to improve mathematical models of transmission and public health interventions… Our observation of an association between repeated vaccination and increased viral aerosol generation demonstrated the power of our method, but needs confirmation.

Shockingly, people who received prior flu shot vaccinations were found to emit 6.3 times (or 630%) the number of flu virus particles emitted by non-vaccinated individuals.

This means — prepare yourself for this realization — that the most responsible way to avoid infecting other people is to AVOID being vaccinated with flu shots.

People who receive flu shots, in other words, are irresponsible spreaders of the flu. They’re the ones making other people sick, just as we’ve observed for years.

“Anti-vaxxers” are responsible citizens because they don’t shed viruses and spread disease

Also from the study:

Self-reported vaccination for the current season was associated with a trend (P < 0.10) toward higher viral shedding in fine-aerosol samples; vaccination with both the current and previous year’s seasonal vaccines, however, was significantly associated with greater fine-aerosol shedding in unadjusted and adjusted models (P < 0.01). In adjusted models, we observed 6.3 (95% CI 1.9–21.5) times more aerosol shedding among cases with vaccination in the current and previous season compared with having no vaccination in those two seasons.

In other words — just to repeat this — people who avoided vaccines spread less than 1/6th the number of flu virus particles compared to those who received flu shots. Thus, non-vaccinated people are the ones who don’t spread the flu. The “anti-vaxxers,” it turns out, are the ones protecting the children after all.

Yet to hear vaccine propagandists like Jimmy Kimmel say it, people who don’t get vaccines are very nearly “child murderers.” That’s the false narrative of the corrupt, pseudoscience vaccine industry.

Scientific evidence that the flu vaccine SPREADS the flu

These results reveal the shocking truth about flu vaccines that few have dared utter, for fear of being branded “anti-vaxxers:” Flu vaccines spread the flu. (Is it by design? We’ll cover that in a later article…)

“Clearly, if this finding is accurate and reproducible, flu vaccination may actually make you more likely to infect others,” explains Sayer Ji in his Green Med Info article. “We have been reporting on the conspicuous lack of evidence for flu vaccine effectiveness (and safety) for over a decade, based largely on the underreported failure of the Cochrane Database Review to show them effective (and safe), despite hundreds of industry-funded studies that have attempted to do so. Learn more: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/shocking-lack-evidence-supporting-flu-vacc…

Far from the current tactic of the vaccine industry blaming non-vaccinated people for spreading disease, this study reveals why it’s actually vaccinated children and adults who keep spreading infectious disease. They are the ones “shedding” the flu virus particles that infect others! (This also explains why flu outbreaks frequently occur among children who were already vaccinated with flu shots.)

“Herd immunity” hoax collapses in the face of real science

Furthermore, the so-called “herd immunity” effect that’s often touted to push more vaccines on everyone has been exposed as a complete hoax by this study. If vaccinated people are the very ones spreading flu virus particles into the air, then the herd is spreading the flu, not preventing it.

“Herd immunity,” it turns out, actually becomes “herd multiplication” of the viral strain, since the herd is “weaponized” into flu virus spreaders. This finally explains why so many children who get infected with the flu (or measles, mumps and other infectious diseases) tend to be the very same children who were vaccinated against those diseases. The vaccines transform children into carriers of the disease, infecting others and contributing to the epidemic. This, in turn, results in panic among the news media, which urges everyone to rush out and get vaccinated as quickly as possible. Within a few days, a second wave of infectious begins to spread, caused by the vaccine itself.

Vaccines, in other words, are self-perpetuating infectious disease spreaders. Their role in society, as currently structured, is to cause infectious disease outbreaks that create a surge in demand for vaccine sales. The media’s role is crucial in all this, as it’s the job of the media to create fear and panic among parents, then urge them to have their children vaccinated. This perpetuates the spread of the disease and sets up the entire scam for another round of outbreaks, panic and vaccine sales.

Vaccine marketing relies on vaccines spreading infectious disease

The product markets itself, in other words. While crack cocaine and heroin rely on addiction for self-perpetuating marketing, vaccines actually cause the very conditions they claim to prevent. Each outbreak then becomes another marketing push, and the cycle repeats in waves (as children are injured and killed by vaccines all across America).

To keep the medical scam going, any person who dares cite legitimate scientific findings that question the vaccine dogma of the modern medical cartel is immediately branded an “anti-vaxxer” and marginalized by the media. Thus, vaccines are never subjected to scientific scrutiny, since all science that observes effects which counter the vaccine dogma is sidelined, attacked or ignored. Only findings that support the pseudoscience vaccine narrative are “accepted” by the medical establishment, thus ensuring that no challenge to vaccine safety or effectiveness can ever see the light of day.

This is how the vaccine industry continues to carry out what has often been called a “medical holocaust” while stifling skepticism, science and critical thinking that dares point out the risks associated with widespread immunization policies.

________________________________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on Flu vaccine BOMBSHELL

The Genocide Conspiracy Against North Korea

January 26, 2018 – The threats made against North Korea are due to one single fact: the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea refuses to accept the world hegemony of the American Empire. It has nothing to do with nuclear weapons. It has become a ritual now to state that all the permanent members of the Security Council are armed with nuclear weapons, that the United States has used them on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that they have continuously threatened to use them to intimidate other nations since 1945, that Pakistan, India, and Israel have them, that NATO members in Europe have them at their disposal under US direction, that North Korea is in violation of no international law in developing them to defend themselves, to ensure their security just as all those other nations have done, that North Korea threatens no one and seeks only to have a full and final peace with the United States.

The nuclear weapon issue is a simply the pretext that the United States is using to try to solidify its tyranny over Korea, over the world. The threat to the world peace comes not from North Korea. It comes from the United States and its allies: the nations who have degraded themselves into subjugated vassal states ready to obey any criminal order of their masters of war in Washington. In response to criminal actions, Christopher Black and Dr. Graeme MacQueen, Founder and former Director of the Centre For Peace Studies, at McMaster University, felt it necessary to send the following Open Letter to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court on January 23 . . .
Full story: journal-neo.org

Comment: These dynamics are changing not just because two Koreas are cozying up to each other but because other regional powers, particularly Russia, are inserting themselves in the peninsula in a way that would considerably help diminish the tension. Russia is positioning itself to act—if the talks between the two Koreas gain traction—by extending the Trans-Siberian railway line via North Korea to South Korea and also by building oil and gas pipelines connecting Siberia and the Russian Far East with Korean markets . . . what we today have on the ground in the Korean peninsula is little to no reason of war between North Korea and the US or between the two Koreas. The détente is likely to go on for some time, and with Russia and China willing to extend it, the US is left with no option but to become a bit “flexible” (journal-neo.org).

US debt levels, deteriorated economic base and eroding support internationally for a President who acts like a petulant school brat, are not the most favorable backdrop to “make America great again” (journal-neo.org). The writing is on the wall: as the collapse of Imperial Rome was followed by her conversion to Papal Rome (The Holy Roman Empire; i.e., Papal Europe), we have seen the US become a latter-day “image of the beast.” Direct military interventions will remain the primary occupation of Washington for years to come. It is all she has left with which to maintain her illusion of hegemony.

__________________________________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on The Genocide Conspiracy Against North Korea

In the Western World Lies Have Displaced Truth

Paul Craig Roberts – 1-31-2018

Last year I was awarded Marquiss Who’s Who In America’s Lifetime Achievement Award. This did not prevent a hidden organization, PropOrNot, from attempting to brand me and my website along with 200 others “Putin stooges or agents” for our refusal to lie for the corrupt, anti-American, anti-constitutional, anti-democratic, warmonger police state interests that rule the Western World.

The only honest, factual media that exists in the Western World today are the names on the PropOrNot list of “Putin agents.”

The purpose of ProOrNot is to convince Americans that freedom of speech must be halted by destroying fact-based Internet media, such as this website and 200 others that provide factual information at odds with Big Brother’s universal brainwashing as delivered by CNN, NPR, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the rest of the utterly corrupt presstitute media, a collection of scum devoid of all integrity and all respect for truth.

A conspiracy of US government agencies, tax-exempt think tanks funded by the ruling interests, and media acting in behalf of a war and police state agenda work to shape perceived reality as it is described in George Orwell’s book, 1984, and in the film, The Matrix. Controlled perception-based reality is only a Facebook “like” away from killing one person or one million or elevating a liar or the warmonger responsible for the killing to hero status or to the control of the CIA or FBI or the US presidency.

Here on OpEdNews is an article by George Eliason that reports on who exactly PropOrNot is and who is underwriting the disinformation that is PropOrNot.
https://www.opednews.com/populum/printer_friendly.php?content=a&id=219560

Eliason’s article is long and documented. It demonstrates the organized conspiracy against truth that exists in the Western World. Nothing stated in the Western presstitute media and no statement by any Western government or subservient vassal state can be trusted to comply with the facts.

Truth is the enemy of the state, and the state is eliminating the truth.

Peoples in the United States, Europe, Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the various vassal states, such as Japan, all live day in, day out, an orchestrated lie that serves interests directly opposed to the interests of the peoples.

_________________________________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on In the Western World Lies Have Displaced Truth

CORRUPTION AND POLITICIANS – IT’S WORSE THAN YOU THINK

Trump is dirty, he’s fully compromised, but not in the way most of his critics claim

On May 9th, 2017 Trump fired FBI director James Comey. The timing and the official justification for the move bordered on the absurd, and set off a firestorm of speculation and accusations. This is intentional. They want you chasing red herrings. He’s waving his left hand so he can make his real move on the right.We’ll get into that more in a moment.

Trump is dirty, he’s fully compromised, but not in the way most of his critics assume.

Both Trump and Bill Clinton were frequent fliers aboard the Lolita Express with Jeffery Epstein. Epstein is the billionaire pedophile who got busted running an elite child prostitution ring.

Victims testified that Epstein had them sleep with rich and powerful men from around the world. They also said that he directed them to collect information on these men. He referred to this as “investing in people”.

Epstein was let off with a slap on the wrist. Pled guilty to one count of soliciting prostitution from an underage girl, and agreed to settle complaints regarding 40 other women in a civil arrangements.

As part of this deal:

Prosecutors agreed not to bring far more serious federal charges against Epstein, and not to charge “potential co-conspirators”, including four named individuals.

From the Guardian

Trump’s name came up several times in this case, and in a separate criminal complaint which accused both Epstein and Trump of raping a minor.

The judge that let Epstein off with a slap on the wrist and protected the other predators was a man named Alexander Acosta. That would be the same Alexander Acosta that Trump nominated as Labor Secretary. I’m sure that’s just a coincidence.

Trump has tried to pretend that he hardly knew Epstein, but he made the following quote in an interview in 2002:

“He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it – Jeffrey enjoys his social life.” Trump in 2002

Now Mr. Comey did behave in a bizarre fashion during the Election. We won’t dive into the details here (lots of wedge issues there). But if you look at that story again in the context of a network of compromised politicians, royalty and ceo’s, one could make the case that it played out something like this: Comey was ordered to stand down. He resisted at first. He saw evidence of corruption. So levers were pulled. Bill Clinton’s conversation with Loretta Lynch on the tarmac was part of this, but we’ll probably never know the full extent. Everyone has skeletons in their closets. Very few have the integrity to do what’s right when facing total ruin.

After Trump launched airstrikes on the Syrian government, in effect strengthening ISIS, Russia immediately suspended its airspace agreement with the United States,. Putin then moved quickly to set up a network of no-fly zones which the United States was banned from. Turkey, which up to that point was a key NATO partner, will be one of the countries enforcing these new zones.

They also issued sharp warnings to the Trump administration and made it clear that they would be reinforcing Syria’s air defenses.

Trump for his part went from criticizing the anti-Russian narratives, and covert wars of the Obama administration, to engaging in exactly the same behavior in an even more aggressive way. Next up: Trump is moving a major occupation force into Raqqa, while simultaneously escalating on multiple fronts around the world.

Trump wants you chasing Russian windmills, so that he can carry on with World War 3.

This also gives talking heads on the alt-right who still support Trump an easy out. Instead of being pressured to admit that the man they helped put into office is evil, and utterly compromised, they get to spar over an issue that (for them and their audience) is patently absurd. This is shielding them from serious questions about their journalistic integrity, and their refusal to call Trump out for what he is.

Time to start confronting these rodeo clowns on both the left and the right. Stop letting them pull people into empty rabbit holes while the most dangerous war in human history kicks off with hardly a murmur of dissent. It just takes one voice to break the conformity principle. The emperor wears no clothes.

And to those positioned in the alphabet soup agencies that can access the evidence from these cases: You need to take a long hard look at the people you’re working for. When the rule of law has been hijacked by abject criminals, there comes a time when disobedience becomes a moral imperative.

___________________________________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on CORRUPTION AND POLITICIANS – IT’S WORSE THAN YOU THINK

Overthrowing Other People’s Governments

January 19, 2018

Instances of the United States overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government)

  • China 1949 to early 1960s
  • Albania 1949-53
  • East Germany 1950s
  • Iran 1953 *
  • Guatemala 1954 *
  • Costa Rica mid-1950s
  • Syria 1956-7
  • Egypt 1957
  • Indonesia 1957-8
  • British Guiana 1953-64 *
  • Iraq 1963 *
  • North Vietnam 1945-73
  • Cambodia 1955-70 *
  • Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 *
  • Ecuador 1960-63 *
  • Congo 1960 *
  • France 1965
  • Brazil 1962-64 *
  • Dominican Republic 1963 *
  • Cuba 1959 to present
  • Bolivia 1964 *
  • Indonesia 1965 *
  • Ghana 1966 *
  • Chile 1964-73 *
  • Greece 1967 *
  • Costa Rica 1970-71
  • Bolivia 1971 *
  • Australia 1973-75 *
  • Angola 1975, 1980s
  • Zaire 1975
  • Portugal 1974-76 *
  • Jamaica 1976-80 *
  • Seychelles 1979-81
  • Chad 1981-82 *
  • Grenada 1983 *
  • South Yemen 1982-84
  • Suriname 1982-84
  • Fiji 1987 *
  • Libya 1980s
  • Nicaragua 1981-90 *
  • Panama 1989 *
  • Bulgaria 1990 *
  • Albania 1991 *
  • Iraq 1991
  • Afghanistan 1980s *
  • Somalia 1993
  • Yugoslavia 1999-2000 *
  • Ecuador 2000 *
  • Afghanistan 2001 *
  • Venezuela 2002 *
  • Iraq 2003 *
  • Haiti 2004 *
  • Somalia 2007 to present
  • Honduras 2009
  • Libya 2011 *
  • Syria 2012
  • Ukraine 2014                            ____________________________________________________________
Posted in Articles | Comments Off on Overthrowing Other People’s Governments

Is Russia a Threat to Western Societies?

Corrupt And Failing Regimes Always Falsely Vilify Those That Are Doing Better

Finian Cunningham, 1-23-24, 2018 “Information Clearing House”

The United States and its NATO allies are facing an existential threat. But the threat has nothing to do with Russia, China, or any other external “enemy” for that matter.

The West’s own worst enemy is itself. Or more precisely, the intellectual bankruptcy of its political and military leaders and their dominant public discourse.

This week Nobel literature laureate Mario Vargas Llosa reportedly condemned the US for descending into “political and intellectual poverty.” He said: “The consequences are predictable: China and Russia are taking the positions that the US is withdrawing from, gaining political and economic influence.”

Perhaps the clearest expression of Western intellectual impoverishment and dishonesty is the relentless Russophobia touted by American and European politicians, military leaders, think-tanks and mainstream corporate news media.

Hardly a week goes by without repetition of this tired old trope alleging that Russia is a threat to Western societies. Russian President Vladimir Putin is portrayed as some kind of “evil genius” hellbent on undermining the West – without a plausible explanation ever being given for why the Russian leader would harbor such alleged dastardly designs.

And if it’s not Russia, it is some other supposed malevolent foreign force, such as China, Iran or North Korea. Yes, the latter has a nuclear weapons program. But the Western public rarely hears that North Korea has embarked on developing these weapons due to decades of warmongering threats from Washington and its allies.

Arguably, though, it is Russophobia that most preoccupies official discourse in the US and Europe.

For the past year and more, Russia is accused of “interfering” in US and European elections, “subverting” democratic processes, and “sowing divisions” among allies with “fake news.”

President Donald Trump, who has at times dismissed claims of Russian meddling in the US elections, has at other times jumped on the Russophobia bandwagon. He signed off the US National Security Strategy last month in which it is asserted that “Russia aims to weaken US influence in the world and divide us from our allies… Through modernized forms of subversive tactics, Russia interferes in the domestic political affairs of countries around the world… The United States and Europe will work together to counter Russian subversion and aggression.”

The relentless Russophobia – an irrational, morbid fear of Russia – is now worse than at any time during the former Cold War, says Moscow’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

British Prime Minister Theresa May glibly accuses Russia of “sowing division”; French President Emmanuel Macron alleges that Russian news media interfered in his country’s elections last year. The EU’s Commissioner on Security Sir Julian King last week casually smeared Russian news media outlets RT and Sputnik as “Kremlin-orchestrated disinformation.”

All these claims are never substantiated with hard evidence or credible analysis. They are simply asserted in the realm of speculation and fantasy.

Surely, if there were any standard of intellectual and journalistic integrity, the claims made against Russia should be tested for objective credibility. But they never are tested or challenged. They are simply mouthed, echoed and amplified by politicians, think-tanks and media.

Of course, that’s not to say the West is devoid of intelligent thinkers. But their voices of sanity are drowned out by the cacophony of nonsense that dominates public discourse.

US-based political analyst Randy Martin says that Washington’s political class is especially bankrupt in intelligence.

He says the American narrative of accusing Russia “has become exhausted” from lack of credibility. “It has become so tired from lack of facts and credibility, ordinary common-sense citizens have become weary of it. The official Washington description of the world has no longer any relevant application to international relations.”

Martin asks: “How can any country chart a viable direction when its strategic thinking is so fundamentally false and, in effect, based on paranoid delusion?” He adds: “It is inevitable that if a nation or group of nations construct policies and allocate resources based on a fundamentally erroneous assessment of the world then such a direction is bound to result in disastrous failure and collapse.”

We have already noted the US National Security Strategy signed off by Trump. Another example is seen with the latest US National Defense Strategy unveiled by Pentagon chief James Mattis last week.

The Pentagon is claiming that Russia (and China) is now a greater security threat to the US than non-state terror groups. To counter Russia, the US is planning to increase its annual military spending to even more astronomical levels – some $700 billion a year.

Also, this week, the head of Britain’s armed forces General Sir Nick Carter made the same pitch as Mattis. In a telling repetition of narrative, Carter reportedly claimed too that Russia presents a greater threat to Britain’s national security than terrorism.

Again, the bottom line is for Britain, as with the US, to allocate more resources to military spending to “confront” the alleged Russian threat.

A core problem, says analyst Randy Martin, is that Western public discourse is dominated by think-tanks which are closely tied to the military-industrial complex and the US-led NATO alliance.

These think-tanks, such as the Atlantic Council, the American Enterprise Institute and Royal United Services Institute, set the parameters for public discussion, which is, in turn, adopted by politicians, military chiefs and news media.

However, because of the intellectual bankruptcy in official Western discourse, there is no rigorous interrogation of the false premises and claims.

“There is no intelligent self-reflection,” says Martin. “Without honest self-reflection the result is eventually a form of collective paranoid delusion.”

It is as blatant as this: The West is so dependent on military industry and financing, the ideology must be constructed to shore up this warped economy. That, in turn, requires casting a world of invented enemies and threats. For that purpose, countries like Russia must be demonized and slandered, otherwise, the whole charade would fall apart.

The function of think-tanks, politicians, military chiefs and the corporate media is to maintain the fiction of “enemies and threats” to justify war and what is otherwise an obscene waste of economic and social resources. This travesty of discourse can only be maintained because of intellectual dishonesty and bankruptcy in the US and its NATO allies.

Such systematic deception is endangering the entire world by fueling tensions and risking all-out war. It is also literally killing societies in the West from poverty and social deprivation. Just think of how much more humane and civilized this world would be if economies were directed away from militarism towards improving life.

The deception is so outrageous, it can only be achieved through massive intellectual corruption in the West. The enemy to these societies is not some foreign entity. Ironically, Western elites who claim to defend their nations from foreign threats are the ones who are actually inflicting the fatal damage.

______________________________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on Is Russia a Threat to Western Societies?

Another Step Toward War

Paul Craig Roberts – 1-11-2018

The US military/security complex has taken another step toward starting a war the US will regret. The Pentagon has prepared a nuclear posture review (NPR) that gives the OK to development of smaller “usable” nuclear weapons and permits their use in response to a non-nuclear attack.

As Reagan and Gorbachev understood, but the warmongers who have taken over America are not sane, there are far too many nuclear weapons already.

It is reckless and irresponsible for Washington to make such a decision in the wake of years of aggressive actions taken against Russia. The Clinton criminal regime broke Washington’s promise that NATO would not move one inch to the East. The George W. Bush criminal regime pulled out of the ABM Treaty and changed US war doctrine to elevate the use of nuclear weapons from retaliation to first strike. The Obama criminal regime launched a frontal propaganda attack on Russia with crazed Hillary’s denunciation of President Putin as “the new Hitler.” In an effort to evict Russia from its naval base in Crimea, the criminal Obama regime overthrew the Ukrainian government during the Sochi Olympics and installed a Washington puppet as the new leader. US missile bases have been established on Russia’s border, and NATO conducts war games against Russia on Russian borders.

This is insanity. These and other gratuitous provocations have convinced the Russian military’s Operation Command that Washington is planning a surprise nuclear attack on Russia. The Russian government has replied to these provocations with the statement that Russia will never again fight a war on its own territory.

Those such as myself who point out that Washington’s reckless and irresponsible behavior has created an enemy out of a country that very much wanted to be friends, do not get much attention from the presstitute media. The US military/security complex needed to invent an enemy sufficient to justify its vast budget and power, and the Western media has accommodated that selfish and dangerous need.

Russia today is far stronger and better armed than the Soviet Union ever was. Russia also has an alliance with China, an economic and military power. This alliance was forced to come together because of Washington’s threats against both countries.

Europe and Japan need to understand that they have responsibility for the resurrection of the Cold War in a far more dangerous form than existed in the 20th century. Europe and Japan, whose political leaders are owned by Washington, have taken money from Washington and sold out their people along with the rest of humanity.

The entirety of the Western World is devoid of honest political leadership. This leaves countries such as Russia, China and Iran with the challenge of preserving life on earth as the Western World pushes humanity toward more war.

____________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on Another Step Toward War

US helicopters evacuate ISIL leaders from Syria

[Another proof that ISIS is funded and backed by the US Government to terrorize Syria. Trump and the US media claim the US is fighting terrorism in Syria, but that is clearly not true. -ed]

US helicopters have evacuated leaders of the Islamic State* terrorist organisation from Deir az-Zor province to Hasakah province in northeast Syria, RT reports with reference to Syrian state-run SANA news agency.

“As part of the activities to support Daesh terrorist organisation (an alternative and derogatory name for the IS, the United States continues evacuating its leaders from the province of Deir ez-Zor,” the agency said.

It was reported that several American helicopters landed near the Al-Basel dam in the south of the Hasakah province.

Earlier, the head of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces Valery Gerasimov stated that there was a terrorist training camp on the territory of the US base of Et-Tanf in southern Syria.

According to him, this is evidenced by the data of space reconnaissance, whereas the people who receive training there are “actually the Islamic State soldiers.” “After training, they take on different names, such as the  New Syrian Army and others,” Gerasimov said, adding that their goal is to destabilise the situation in the region.

*ISIS is a terrorist organisation banned in Russia.

__________________________________________________________________

 

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on US helicopters evacuate ISIL leaders from Syria

What Is Happening In Iran?

[The CIA and the US Military Industrial Complex are at war 24/7 with nearly every nation on the planet, particularly those which prefer to be left alone and not fall under the domination of US hegemony. The attacks from the US usually begin as sanctions and covert CIA  agents causing disruption, then it evolves eventually into military action. War planners in the US are constantly scheming to disrupt and take over non-compliant governments worldwide. The US Government wants to control all the nations of the world, but Iran has struggled to maintain its independence. CIA agents are stirring up the protests we see now in Syria. Given enough time these agents can trick many citizens into joining protests. Plus, many of them are professional protesters and planners who are full time paid employees and propagandists planted by the US Government. The US Government has been targeting and disrupting Iran for many years. -ed.]

———————————————-

By Brandon Turbeville – 

A familiar sight is taking place across Iran tonight and it has been for the last three days. Protests are taking place in numerous cities citing grievances and demanding that the Ayatollah and Iranian President step down. For a few days, the protests remained non-violent but now violence has indeed flared up as protesters have laid waste to a number of government properties and those belonging to “pro-government militias.”

Neo-cons in the American media and the U.S. President are all demanding that Americans stand with the “Iranian people” and the “protesters” in their “fight for freedom.”

The reason this sight is familiar is because we have seen it in Egypt, Libya, Syria and the Ukraine in the past as well as in Iran itself in the late 2000s. Protests that turn violent, a subsequent crackdown that either is violent or is reported as such, and the weight of American propaganda against the target government are all “Arab Spring” repeats that are themselves nothing more than the color revolution/destabilization apparatus that has been used by the West in countries all across the world for decades, particularly in the last twenty years.

What Do The Protesters Want?

The alleged demands of the protesters seem reasonable and legitimate enough. The Western media has, up until this point, been reporting that the main argument being made by the demonstrators center around economic concerns, i.e. falling living standards, unemployment, and rising food prices. However, as the third day of protests took place, the Western media began reporting that the protesters are demanding an end to religious dictatorship and policies of both the Ayatollah Khamenei and President Rouhani. According to some reports, female protesters have gone so far as to shout “death to Khamenei” and shed their hijabs in order to construct makeshift flags. Others say the protesters are focused on government corruption.

However, there is much question about these protests. The first question is “Are they organic Iranian protests?” This question has yet to be answered fully. Iran is most certainly a religious dictatorship and many Iranians want freedom from religious rule. However, it should be remembered that the United States and Israel have openly stated a desire to see Iranian influence broken and as recently as 2009, the United States attempted to engineer a color revolution in the country. The first three days of the Green Movement in Iran looked very much like the first three days of this current movement.

Clearly, economic concerns are a major issue in Iran, a country whose economy has been suffering for years under Western sanctions and whose own inability to capitalize on a state-owned National Bank. Official unemployment in Iran is around 12% and it is likely that the real rate is much higher. Despite lifting of some sanctions, there is hardly economic growth in the country, another result of neo-liberal economic and trade policies. Yet, it is also worth noting that Khamenei has also been critical of the poor economy and the handling of economic issues by the government yet Khamenei is being insulted at the protests.

These demands are not unreasonable by any stretch of the imagination. However, the religious protests come at a very odd time. Iran recently liberalized its laws regarding women’s forced head coverings, so why protest now over religious laws?

In addition, special attention must be paid to the concept of “government corruption,” a hallmark of color revolutions since government corruption is often more of a conceptual issue than anything concrete. A step down from power from a few key people, wrist slaps, and token reform can all achieve an “end” to corruption while more concrete demands need concrete applications and thus present a minor loss to those who will taking over the rains of power after the demonstrations have ceased.

There are also more concerning demands that can be found in the slogans being chanted by the demonstrators. First, in case it could be missed, the demonstrators are calling for the Ayatollah and the President to step down. In other words, they are calling for regime change. This is precisely what the United States, GCC, NATO, and Israel also want to see happen.

Second, numerous demonstrators are chanting “Let go of Palestine,” and “Not for Gaza, Not for Lebanon, I’d give my life (only) for Iran.” Again, protesters are now chanting foreign policy demands identical to that desired by the United States, NATO, GCC, and Israel. All this in a protest that is supposed to be about economic concerns.

Moon of Alabama, in its article entitled “Iran – Regime Change Agents Hijack Economic Protests,” reveals a number of important reports regarding the beginning of the protests and where they stand currently. MOA writes,

Protests against the (neo-)liberal economic policies of the Rohani government in Iran are justified. Official unemployment in Iran is above 12% and there is hardly any economic growth. The people in the streets are not the only ones who are dissatisfied with this:

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has repeatedly criticized the government’s economic record, said on Wednesday that the nation was struggling with “high prices, inflation and recession”, and asked officials to resolve the problems with determination.

On Thursday and today the slogans of some protesters turned the call for economic relief into a call for regime change.

. . . . .

Today, Friday and the weekly day off in Iran, several more protest took place in other cities. A Reuters report from today:

About 300 demonstrators gathered in Kermanshah after what Fars called a “call by the anti-revolution” and shouted “Political prisoners should be freed” and “Freedom or death”, while destroying some public property. Fars did not name any opposition groups.

Footage, which could not be verified, showed protests in other cities including Sari and Rasht in the north, Qom south of Tehran, and Hamadan in the west.

Mohsen Nasj Hamadani, deputy security chief in Tehran province, said about 50 people had rallied in a Tehran square and most left after being asked by police, but a few who refused were “temporarily detained”, the ILNA news agency reported.

Some of these protests have genuine economic reasons but get hijacked by other interests:

In the central city of Isfahan, a resident said protesters joined a rally held by factory workers demanding back wages.

“The slogans quickly changed from the economy to those against (President Hassan) Rouhani and the Supreme Leader (Ayatollah Ali Khamenei),” the resident said by telephone.

Purely political protests are rare in Iran […] but demonstrations are often held by workers over layoffs or non-payment of salaries and people who hold deposits in non-regulated, bankrupt financial institutions.

Alamolhoda, the representative of Ayatollah Khamenei in northeastern Mashhad, said a few people had taken advantage of Thursday’s protests against rising prices to chant slogans against Iran’s role in regional conflicts.

“Some people had came to express their demands, but suddenly, in a crowd of hundreds, a small group that did not exceed 50 shouted deviant and horrendous slogans such as ‘Let go of Palestine’, ‘Not Gaza, not Lebanon, I’d give my life (only) for Iran’,” Alamolhoda said.

Media and Neo-Con Support

While it is to be expected from a virulently anti-Iran administration and mainstream press in the United States, it is interesting how the U.S. President immediately has latched on the protests, encouraging Americans to stand with the protesters and their demands. This is coming from a man who rarely sees a protest that isn’t directed at him. Meanwhile, Neo-Con organs like FOX News are also repeating calls for Americans to support the brave “freedom fighters” in Iran. It is seldom, if ever, true that evil does good in the world so when Neo-Cons call for support to protests, eyebrows should be raised in skepticism.

It is also important to question just how popular these protests are. While mainstream western media and various terrorist organizations also conveniently supporting them paint them as involving tens of thousands at each demonstration, video and pictures tend to show only dozens while others wander about around them.

“A video of that protest in Mashad showed some 50 people chanting slogans with more bystander just milling around,” writes MOA. . . . . “Two videos posted by BBC Persian and others I have seen show only small active protest groups with a dozen or so people while many more are just standing by or film the people who are chanting slogans.”

Trump Administration/Israel Agreement

The protests taking place in Iran are taking place only a month after the White House and Tel Aviv met to discuss a strategy on Iran. “A delegation led by Israel’s National Security Adviser met with senior American officials in the White House earlier this month for a joint discussion on strategy to counter Iran’s aggression in the Middle East, a senior U.S. official confirmed to Haaretz,” wrote Haaretz agency. (Israeli Delegation Met U.S. Officials to Discuss ‘Iran Strategy,’ Syria)

AXIOS provides a quote from the meeting:

[T]he U.S. and Israel see eye to eye the different developments in the region and especially those that are connected to Iran. We reached at understandings regarding the strategy and the policy needed to counter Iran. Our understandings deal with the overall strategy but also with concrete goals, way of action and the means which need to be used to get obtain those goals.

Could this apparent color revolution be the result of that US/Israeli meeting?

Color Revolution In Iran

The idea that a color revolution could be attempted in Iran is no fantasy. It would be a repeat of history. Remember, in 2009, an attempt at a color revolution deemed the “Green Revolution” was launched but was quickly put down by the iron fist of the Iranian government.

The Path To Persia

The plan for a Western or a Western/Israeli attack on Iran, along with the theatre of alleged US-Israeli tensions leading up to a strike and outright war, has been in the works for some time. For instance, in 2009, the Brookings Institution, a major banking, corporate, and military-industrial firm, released a report entitled “Which Path To Persia? Options For A New American Strategy For Iran,” in which the authors mapped out a plan which leaves no doubt as to the ultimate desire from the Western financier, corporate, and governing classes.

The plan involves the description of a number of ways the Western oligarchy would be able to destroy Iran including outright military invasion and occupation. However, the report attempts to outline a number of methods that might possibly be implemented before direct military invasion would be necessary. The plan included attempting to foment destabilization inside Iran via the color revolution apparatus, violent unrest, proxy terrorism, and “limited airstrikes” conducted by the US, Israel or both.

The report states,

Because the Iranian regime is widely disliked by many Iranians, the most obvious and palatable method of bringing about its demise would be to help foster a popular revolution along the lines of the “velvet revolutions” that toppled many communist governments in Eastern Europe beginning in 1989. For many proponents of regime change, it seems self-evident that the United States should encourage the Iranian people to take power in their own name, and that this would be the most legitimate method of regime change. After all, what Iranian or foreigner could object to helping the Iranian people fulfill their own desires?

Moreover, Iran’s own history would seem to suggest that such an event is plausible. During the 1906 Constitutional Movement, during the late 1930s, arguably during the 1950s, and again during the 1978 Iranian Revolution, coalitions of intellectuals, students, peasants, bazaari merchants, Marxists, constitutionalists, and clerics mobilized against an unpopular regime. In both 1906 and 1978, the revolutionaries secured the support of much of the populace and, in so doing, prevailed. There is evidence that the Islamic regime has antagonized many (perhaps all) of these same factions to the point where they again might be willing to support a change if they feel that it could succeed. This is the foundational belief of those Americans who support regime change, and their hope is that the United States can provide whatever the Iranian people need to believe that another revolution is feasible.

Of course, popular revolutions are incredibly complex and rare events. There is little scholarly consensus on what causes a popular revolution, or even the conditions that facilitate them. Even factors often associated with revolutions, such as military defeat, neglect of the military, economic crises, and splits within the elite have all been regular events across the world and throughout history, but only a very few have resulted in a popular revolution. Consequently, all of the literature on how best to promote a popular revolution— in Iran or anywhere else—is highly speculative. Nevertheless, it is the one policy option that holds out the prospect that the United States might eliminate all of the problems it faces from Iran, do so at a bearable cost, and do so in a manner that is acceptable to the Iranian people and most of the rest of the world.

Conclusion

While the situation in Iran continues to develop, it appears that another color revolution is underway. While many of the demands are legitimate, all signs are pointing toward Western treachery in an attempt to break Iran in the final domino to fall in the Middle East before an even bigger confrontation is ignited. Destroying Iran would also destroy Hezbollah, weaken Syria and Russia, and threaten Israel. Whether or not it will succeed will depend on the level of subversion that has been possible by the United States intelligence apparatus since 2009 and the ability of Iran to squash the revolt. If anything can be learned from the 2009 revolution, Iran will move quickly and will smash the protests with an iron fist. However, if the protests taking place in Iran today are indeed a color revolution and if the West is committed, the Path to Persia will likely see an escalation in activity, violence, and ultimately directly military confrontation by proxy and even by the U.S. military itself.

____________________________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on What Is Happening In Iran?

Russia and China Challenge Dollar Domination

THE CHINESE PETRO-YUAN IS ON THE RISE, AND MAY REPLACE THE U.S. PETRO-DOLLAR FOR INTERNATIONAL OIL TRADE

By F. William Engdahl – Dec. 21, 2017

The Russian government has recently announced it will issue nearly $1 billion equivalent in state bonds, but denominated not in US dollars as is the usual case. Rather it will be the first sale of Russian bonds in China’s yuan. While $1 billion may not sound like much when compared with the Peoples’ Bank of China total holdings of US Government debt of more than $1 trillion or to the US Federal debt today of over $20 trillion, it’s significance lies beyond the nominal amount. It’s a test run by both governments of the potential for state financing of infrastructure and other projects independent of dollar risk from such events as US Treasury financial sanctions.

Russian Debt and China Yuan

Since the August 1998 sovereign default triggered by the West, Russian state finances have been prudent to almost a fault. The size of the national government debt is the lowest of any major industrial country, a mere 10.6% of GDP for the current year. This has enabled Russia to withstand the US financial warfare sanctions imposed since 2014, and forced the country to turn elsewhere for their financial stability. That “elsewhere” is increasingly called the Peoples’ Republic of China.

Now the Russian Ministry of Finance is reportedly planning the first sale of Russian debt in the form of bonds denominated in Chinese yuan currency. The size of the first offering, a testing of the market, will be 6 billion yuan or just under $1 billion. The sale is being organized by the state-owned Russian Gazprombank, the Bank of China Ltd., and China’s largest state bank, Industrial & Commercial Bank of China. The move is being accelerated by reports that the US Treasury is examining potential consequences of extending penalties, until now concentrated on Russian oil and gas projects, to include Russian sovereign debt in its sanctions warfare. The new yuan bond will be traded on the Moscow Exchange and will aim to sell to mainland Chinese investors as well as international and Russian borrowers at attractive interest rates.

Western sanctions or threats of sanctions are forcing Russia and China to cooperate more strategically on what is becoming the seed of a genuine alternative to the dollar system. The Russian yuan debt offerings will also give a significant boost to China’s desire to build the yuan as an accepted international currency.

China Petro-Yuan

The steps to begin issuing Russian state debt in yuan are paralleled by another major development towards broader international yuan acceptance vis a vis the US dollar. On December 13, Chinese regulators completed final testing in preparation for launch of not a dollar-backed, but rather, a yuan-backed oil futures contract to be traded on the Shanghai Futures Exchange. The implications are potentially large.

China is the world’s largest oil importing country. Control of financial oil futures markets until now has been the tightly-guarded province of Wall Street banks and the New York, London and other futures exchanges they control. Emergence of Shanghai as a major yuan-based oil futures center could significantly weaken dollar domination of oil trade.

Since the 1970’s oil shock and the 400% rise in the oil price from OPEC countries, Washington has maintained a strict regime in which the world’s most valuable commodity, oil, would be traded in US dollars alone. In December 1974, the US Treasury signed a secret agreement in Riyadh with the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency, “to establish a new relationship through the Federal Reserve Bank of New York with the US Treasury borrowing operation” to buy US government debt with surplus petrodollars.

The Saudis agreed to enforce OPEC dollar-only oil sales in return for US sales of advanced military equipment (purchased for dollars of course) and a guarantee of protection from possible Israeli attack. This was the beginning of what then-US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger called recycling the petro-dollar. To the present, only two oil export country leaders, Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Libya’s Qaddafi, have tried to change the system and sell oil for euros or gold dinars. The US government arranged to murder both Saddam Hussein and Qaddafi, and bomb their countries into the stone age for it). Now China is challenging the petro-dollar system in a different way with the petro-yuan.

The difference between Saddam Hussein or Qaddafi is that far more influential countries, Russia and now Iran, with China’s implicit support, are cooperating to avoid the dollar out of necessity forced by US pressure. That is a far stronger challenge to the US dollar than Iraq or Libya could ever manage.

__________________________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on Russia and China Challenge Dollar Domination

Trump’s National Security Speech

[Trump went from being a buffoon on a TV show (The Apprentice) to being a brainless puppet president ruled by the US Military Complex and by Israel. He has nothing intelligent to say, and nothing but war to offer the American people. The US Government has turned America into the most dangerous and hated nation in the world. -ed]

Paul Craig Roberts  December 19, 2017

What do we make of Trump’s national security speech? First of all, it is the military/security complex’s speech, and it is inconsistent with Trump’s intention of normalizing relations with Russia.

The military/security complex, using Trump’s position as President, has defined Russia and China as “revisionist powers,” Washington’s rivals who seek to put their own national interests ahead of Washington’s unilateralism. Russia and China are “revisionist powers” because their assertion of their national interests limits Washington’s hegemony.

In other words, Washington does not accept the validity of other countries’ interests if those interests are contrary to Washington’s interests. So, how does Trump expect to work with Russia and China when he reads a speech that Russia and China seek to “shape a world antithetical to our interests and values.”

“Our values” means, of course, Washington’s dominance.

Trump begins by honoring the military, police, Homeland Security, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In other words, “America first” means domination by Washington over the citizenry as well as over foreign countries.

Trump then cloaks himself in the American people who “voted to make America great again.”

Then Trump’s speech picks up the Israel Lobby’s line about a bad deal with Iran and asserts that previous administrations tolerated ISIS, when in fact they created it and set in upon Libya and Syria.

Then he attacks environmental protection and complains of illegal aliens, while ignoring the refugees Washington’s wars imposed on Europe.

In an era of neoconservative celebration of US world hegemony, Trump accuses his predecessors of losing confidence in America. This is extraordinary. When a country’s entire foreign policy is based on the assumption that it is the “exceptional and indispensable country,” how is this a loss of confidence? It is massive arrogance and hubris. The problem is not a loss of confidence by the rulers but an overbearing hubris.

Then Trump claims that through him, Americans again rule their nation.

He says that now Washington is serving the citizens. Looking at the tax bill, he must mean that citizens consist of the One Percent.

He next associates making America first with more money for the military.

Then he blames Iran for terrorism, something that Iran lives in fear of, but he does not mention Saudi Arabia’s support for terrorism or that of the US military/security complex’s which encourages terrorism as a weapon against Iran and Russia and as an excuse for its massive budget and power.

Trump then claims credit for the Russian/Syrian defeat of ISIS. It has been proved that ISIS is supported and financed by Washington. Trump’s claim is even more ridiculous than the previous claims of the Obama regime that the US defeated National Socialist Germany. Russia, which did defeat Germany, was not invited to the anniversary celebration.

Trump next demands that the countries we defend pay for it. Who are these countries and who do we defend them from? He can only mean Europe, Canada, Australia, Israel, and Japan. Is Washington defending them from Russia, China, North Korea and Iran or from the terrorists Washington creates, arms, and supplies to overthrow Libya, Syria and whatever countries Washington is successful siccing terrorists on. Apparently, some of these CIA-created terrorist organizations break loose from their creator and conduct operations on their own. So, Washington is a government that creates its own enemies.

Trump next brags on the sanctions he has imposed on “the North Korean regime.” He doesn’t mention, and I would bet he does not know, that Washington has withheld a peace treaty since the 1950s from North Korea. Washington has kept the war status open for 64 years. Having seen the fate of Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia, etc., little wonder North Korea wants nuclear weapons.

Trump, standing there threatening the world, says that Washington will take all necessary steps to prevent North Korea from threatening the world.

Trump then delivers the establishment’s propaganda that unemployment is at an all time low and the stock market at an all time high. So, what is Trump rescuing Middle America from if unemployment is at an all time low? What happened to Trump’s case against jobs offshoring?

This is nothing but feel-good talk. Trump is repeating the lies because the lies make him look good. What Trump should be doing is pointing out the meaninglessness of the unemployment rate, because it doesn’t count the unemployed, only those few who looked for a job in the last 4 weeks. He should be pointing out that the stock market is not a sign of a growing economy but a sign of massive money creation by the central banks of the US, EU, UK, and Japan. The massive printing of money has flooded into paper assets, driving up their price and further enriching the One Percent.

Trump says that one leg of the strategy is to “preserve peace through strength.” What peace is he talking about? In the past two decades Washington has destroyed in whole or part eight countries and overthrown democratic governments in others. Is Trump equating peace with Washington’s wars? No other country has initiated wars and invasions and bombings and aggressive military actions on other countries’ borders. Trump says that America is threatened by enemies and to protect us the military will be enlarged. He said he was overturning the “defense sequester,” something that clearly does not exist.

My conclusion is that Trump has surrendered to the real rulers of America—the powerful interest groups such as the military/security complex, the Israel Lobby, the environmental polluters, Wall Street and the banks “too big to fail.”

America is a country in which despite the hopes flyover America had in Trump, an oligarchy rules. The American people, regardless of who they elect, have no voice, no input, no representation.

The governments of Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush were the last governments that were subject to any accountability. With the Clinton regime the United States entered into the age of tyranny.

___________________________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on Trump’s National Security Speech

US At War With The World: Elite Commandos Deployed to 149 Countries in 2017

Nick Turse – December 17, 2017

“We don’t know exactly where we’re at in the world, militarily, and what we’re doing,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, in October. That was in the wake of the combat deaths of four members of the Special Operations forces in the West African nation of Niger. Graham and other senators expressed shock about the deployment, but the global sweep of America’s most elite forces is, at best, an open secret.

Earlier this year before that same Senate committee — though Graham was not in attendance — General Raymond Thomas, the chief of U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM), offered some clues about the planetwide reach of America’s most elite troops. “We operate and fight in every corner of the world,” he boasted.  “Rather than a mere ‘break-glass-in-case-of-war’ force, we are now proactively engaged across the ‘battle space’ of the Geographic Combatant Commands… providing key integrating and enabling capabilities to support their campaigns and operations.”

In 2017, U.S. Special Operations forces, including Navy SEALs and Army Green Berets, deployed to 149 countries around the world, according to figures provided to TomDispatch by U.S. Special Operations Command.  That’s about 75% of the nations on the planet and represents a jump from the 138 countries that saw such deployments in 2016 under the Obama administration.  It’s also a jump of nearly 150% from the last days of George W. Bush’s White House.  This record-setting number of deployments comes as American commandos are battling a plethora of terror groups in quasi-wars that stretch from Africa and the Middle East to Asia.

“Most Americans would be amazed to learn that U.S. Special Operations Forces have been deployed to three quarters of the nations on the planet,” observes William Hartung, the director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy.  “There is little or no transparency as to what they are doing in these countries and whether their efforts are promoting security or provoking further tension and conflict.”

Growth Opportunity


America’s elite troops were deployed to 149 nations in 2017, according to U.S. Special Operations Command.  The map above displays the locations of 132 of those countries; 129 locations (in blue) were supplied by U.S. Special Operations Command; 3 locations (in red) — Syria, Yemen and Somalia — were derived from open-source information. (Nick Turse)

“Since 9/11, we expanded the size of our force by almost 75% in order to take on mission-sets that are likely to endure,” SOCOM’s Thomas told the Senate Armed Services Committee in May.  Since 2001, from the pace of operations to their geographic sweep, the activities of U.S. Special Operations forces (SOF) have, in fact, grown in every conceivable way.  On any given day, about 8,000 special operators — from a command numbering roughly 70,000 — are deployed in approximately 80 countries.

“The increase in the use of Special Forces since 9/11 was part of what was then referred to as the Global War on Terror as a way to keep the United States active militarily in areas beyond its two main wars, Iraq and Afghanistan,” Hartung told TomDispatch.  “The even heavier reliance on Special Forces during the Obama years was part of a strategy of what I think of as ‘politically sustainable warfare,’ in which the deployment of tens of thousands of troops to a few key theaters of war was replaced by a ‘lighter footprint’ in more places, using drones, arms sales and training, and Special Forces.”

The Trump White House has attacked Barack Obama’s legacy on nearly all fronts.  It has undercut, renounced, or reversed actions of his ranging from trade pacts to financial and environmental regulations to rules that shielded transgender employees from workplace discrimination.  When it comes to Special Operations forces, however, the Trump administration has embraced their use in the style of the former president, while upping the ante even further.  President Trump has also provided military commanders greater authority to launch attacks in quasi-war zones like Yemen and Somalia.  According to Micah Zenko, a national security expert and Whitehead Senior Fellow at the think tank Chatham House, those forces conducted five times as many lethal counterterrorism missions in such non-battlefield countries in the Trump administration’s first six months in office as they did during Obama’s final six months.

A Wide World of War

U.S. commandos specialize in 12 core skills, from “unconventional warfare” (helping to stoke insurgencies and regime change) to “foreign internal defense” (supporting allies’ efforts to guard themselves against terrorism, insurgencies, and coups). Counterterrorism — fighting what SOCOM calls violent extremist organizations or VEOs — is, however, the specialty America’s commandos have become best known for in the post-9/11 era.

In the spring of 2002, before the Senate Armed Services Committee, SOCOM chief General Charles Holland touted efforts to “improve SOF capabilities to prosecute unconventional warfare and foreign internal defense programs to better support friends and allies. The value of these programs, demonstrated in the Afghanistan campaign,” he said, “can be particularly useful in stabilizing countries and regions vulnerable to terrorist infiltration.”

Over the last decade and a half, however, there’s been little evidence America’s commandos have excelled at “stabilizing countries and regions vulnerable to terrorist infiltration.”  This was reflected in General Thomas’s May testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee. “The threat posed by VEOs remains the highest priority for USSOCOM in both focus and effort,” he explained.

However, unlike Holland who highlighted only one country — Afghanistan — where special operators were battling militants in 2002, Thomas listed a panoply of terrorist hot spots bedeviling America’s commandos a decade and a half later.  “Special Operations Forces,” he said, “are the main effort, or major supporting effort for U.S. VEO-focused operations in Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, across the Sahel of Africa, the Philippines, and Central/South America — essentially, everywhere Al Qaeda (AQ) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) are to be found.”

Officially, there are about 5,300 U.S. troops in Iraq.  (The real figure is thought to be higher.)  Significant numbers of them are special operators training and advising Iraqi government forces and Kurdish troops.  Elite U.S. forces have also played a crucial role in Iraq’s recent offensive against the militants of the Islamic State, providing artillery and airpower, including SOCOM’s AC-130W Stinger II gunships with 105mm cannons that allow them to serve as flying howitzers.  In that campaign, Special Operations forces were “thrust into a new role of coordinating fire support,” wrote Linda Robinson, a senior international policy analyst with the RAND Corporation who spent seven weeks in Iraq, Syria, and neighboring countries earlier this year. “This fire support is even more important to the Syrian Democratic Forces, a far more lightly armed irregular force which constitutes the major ground force fighting ISIS in Syria.”

Special Operations forces have, in fact, played a key role in the war effort in Syria, too.  While American commandos have been killed in battle there, Kurdish and Arab proxies — known as the Syrian Democratic Forces — have done the lion’s share of the fighting and dying to take back much of the territory once held by the Islamic State.  SOCOM’s Thomas spoke about this in surprisingly frank terms at a security conference in Aspen, Colorado, this summer.  “We’re right now inside the capital of [ISIS’s] caliphate at Raqqa [Syria].  We’ll have that back soon with our proxies, a surrogate force of 50,000 people that are working for us and doing our bidding,” he said.  “So two and a half years of fighting this fight with our surrogates, they’ve lost thousands, we’ve only lost two service members. Two is too many, but it’s, you know, a relief that we haven’t had the kind of losses that we’ve had elsewhere.”

This year, U.S. special operators were killed in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and the Sahelian nations of Niger and Mali (although reports indicate that a Green Beret who died in that country was likely strangled by U.S. Navy SEALs).  In Libya, SEALs recently kidnapped a suspect in the 2012 attacks in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.  In the Philippines, U.S. Special Forces joined the months-long battle to recapture Marawi City after it was taken by Islamist militants earlier this year.

And even this growing list of counterterror hotspots is only a fraction of the story.  In Africa, the countries singled out by Thomas — Somalia, Libya, and those in the Sahel — are just a handful of the nations to which American commandos were deployed in 2017. As recently reported at Vice News, U.S. Special Operations forces were active in at least 33 nations across the continent, with troops heavily concentrated in and around countries now home to a growing number of what the Pentagon’s Africa Center for Strategic Studies calls “active militant Islamist groups.”  While Defense Department spokeswoman Major Audricia Harris would not provide details on the range of operations being carried out by the elite forces, it’s known that they run the gamut from conducting security assessments at U.S. embassies to combat operations.

Data provided by SOCOM also reveals a special ops presence in 33 European countries this year.  “Outside of Russia and Belarus we train with virtually every country in Europe either bilaterally or through various multinational events,” Major Michael Weisman, a spokesman for U.S. Special Operations Command Europe, told TomDispatch.

For the past two years, in fact, the U.S. has maintained a Special Operations contingent in almost every nation on Russia’s western border.  “[W]e’ve had persistent presence in every country — every NATO country and others on the border with Russia doing phenomenal things with our allies, helping them prepare for their threats,” said SOCOM’s Thomas, mentioning the Baltic states as well as Romania, Poland, Ukraine, and Georgia by name.  These activities represent, in the words of General Charles Cleveland, chief of U.S. Army Special Operations Command from 2012 to 2015 and now the senior mentor to the Army War College, “undeclared campaigns” by commandos. Weisman, however, balked at that particular language.  “U.S. Special Operations forces have been deployed persistently and at the invitation of our allies in the Baltic States and Poland since 2014 as part of the broader U.S. European Command and Department of Defense European Deterrence Initiative,” he told TomDispatch.  “The persistent presence of U.S. SOF alongside our Allies sends a clear message of U.S. commitment to our allies and the defense of our NATO Alliance.”

Asia is also a crucial region for America’s elite forces.  In addition to Iran and Russia, SOCOM’s Thomas singled out China and North Korea as nations that are “becoming more aggressive in challenging U.S. interests and partners through the use of asymmetric means that often fall below the threshold of conventional conflict.”  He went on to say that the “ability of our special operators to conduct low-visibility special warfare operations in politically sensitive environments make them uniquely suited to counter the malign activities of our adversaries in this domain.”

U.S.-North Korean saber rattling has brought increased attention to Special Forces Detachment Korea (SFDK), the longest serving U.S. Special Forces unit in the world.  It would, of course, be called into action should a war ever break out on the peninsula.  In such a conflict, U.S. and South Korean elite forces would unite under the umbrella of the Combined Unconventional Warfare Task Force.  In March, commandos — including, according to some reports, members of the Army’s Delta Force and the Navy’s SEAL Team 6 — took part in Foal Eagle, a training exercise, alongside conventional U.S. forces and their South Korean counterparts.

U.S. special operators also were involved in training exercises and operations elsewhere across Asia and the Pacific.  In June, in Okinawa, Japan, for example, airmen from the 17th Special Operations Squadron (17th SOS) carried out their annual (and oddly spelled) “Day of the Jakal,” the launch of five Air Force Special Operations MC-130J Commando II aircraft to practice, according to a military news release, “airdrops, aircraft landings, and rapid infiltration and exfiltration of equipment.”  According to Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Patrick Dube of the 17th SOS, “It shows how we can meet the emerging mission sets for both SOCKOR [Special Operations Command Korea] and SOCPAC [Special Operations Command Pacific] out here in the Pacific theater.”

At about the same time, members of the Air Force’s 353rd Special Operations Group carried out Teak Jet, a joint combined exchange training, or JCET, mission meant to improve military coordination between U.S. and Japanese forces.  In June and July, intelligence analysts from the Air Force’s 353rd Special Operations Group took part in Talisman Saber, a biennial military training exercise conducted in various locations across Australia.

More for War

The steady rise in the number of elite operators, missions, and foreign deployments since 9/11 appears in no danger of ending, despite years of worries by think-tank experts and special ops supporters about the effects of such a high operations tempo on these troops.  “Most SOF units are employed to their sustainable limit,” General Thomas said earlier this year. “Despite growing demand for SOF, we must prioritize the sourcing of these demands as we face a rapidly changing security environment.”  Yet the number of deployments still grew to a record 149 nations in 2017.  (During the Obama years, deployments reached 147 in 2015.)

At a recent conference on special operations held in Washington, D.C., influential members of the Senate and House armed services committees acknowledged that there were growing strains on the force. “I do worry about overuse of SOF,” said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry, a Republican.  One solution offered by both Jack Reed, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Republican Senator Joni Ernst, a combat veteran who served in Iraq, was to bulk up Special Operations Command yet more.  “We have to increase numbers and resources,” Reed insisted.

This desire to expand Special Operations further comes at a moment when senators like Lindsey Graham continue to acknowledge how remarkably clueless they are about where those elite forces are deployed and what exactly they are doing in far-flung corners of the globe.  Experts point out just how dangerous further expansion could be, given the proliferation of terror groups and battle zones since 9/11 and the dangers of unforeseen blowback as a result of low-profile special ops missions.

“Almost by definition, the dizzying number of deployments undertaken by U.S. Special Operations forces in recent years would be hard to track.  But few in Congress seem to be even making the effort,” said William Hartung. “This is a colossal mistake if one is concerned about reining in the globe-spanning U.S. military strategy of the post-9/11 era, which has caused more harm than good and done little to curb terrorism.”

However, with special ops deployments rising above Bush and Obama administration levels to record-setting heights and the Trump administration embracing the use of commandos in quasi-wars in places like Somalia and Yemen, there appears to be little interest in the White House or on Capitol Hill in reining in the geographic scope and sweep of America’s most secretive troops.  And the results, say experts, may be dire.  “While the retreat from large ‘boots on the ground’ wars like the Bush administration’s intervention in Iraq is welcome,” said Hartung, “the proliferation of Special Operations forces is a dangerous alternative, given the prospects of getting the United States further embroiled in complex overseas conflicts.”

________________________________________________________________

 

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on US At War With The World: Elite Commandos Deployed to 149 Countries in 2017

“Sorry Chump, You Didn’t Have It In Writing”

At a time when the United States is convulsed by anti-Russian hysteria and demonization of Vladimir Putin, a trove of recently declassified Cold War documents reveals the astounding extent of the lies, duplicity and double-dealing engaged in by the western powers with the collapsing Soviet Union in 1990.

I was covering Moscow in those days and met some of the key players in this sordid drama.   Ever since, I’ve been writing that the Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, and Foreign Minister, Eduard Shevardnadze, were shamelessly lied to and deceived by the United States, Britain, and their appendage, NATO.

All the western powers promised Gorbachev and Shevardnadze that NATO would not expand eastward by ‘one inch’ if Moscow would pull the Red Army out of East Germany and allow it to peacefully reunify with West Germany.  This was a titanic concession by Gorbachev: it led to a failed coup against him in 1991 by Communist hardliners.

The documents released by George Washington University in Washington DC, which I attended for a semester, make sickening reading (see them online).  All western powers and statesmen assured the Russians that NATO would not take advantage of the Soviet retreat and that a new era of amity and cooperation would dawn in post-Cold War Europe.  US Secretary of State Jim Baker offered ‘ironclad guarantees’ there would be no NATO expansion.  Lies, all lies.

Gorbachev was a humanist, a very decent, intelligent man who believed he could end the Cold War and nuclear arms race.   He ordered the Red Army back from Eastern Europe.  I was in Wunsdorf, East Germany, HQ of the Group of Soviet Forces, Germany, and at Stasi secret police HQ in East Berlin right after the pullout order was given.  The Soviets withdrew their 338,000 troops and 4,200 tanks and sent them home at lightening speed.

Western promises made to Soviet leaders by President George W. H. Bush and Jim Baker quickly proved to be empty.  They were honorable men but their successors were not.  Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush quickly began moving NATO into Eastern Europe, violating all the pledges made to Moscow.

The Poles, Hungarians and Czechs were brought into NATO, then Romania and Bulgaria, the Baltic States, Albania, and Montenegro.  Washington tried to get the former Soviet Republics of Georgia and Ukraine into NATO.  The Moscow-aligned government of Ukraine was overthrown in a US-engineered coup.  The road to Moscow was open.

All the bankrupt, confused Russians could do was denounce these eastward moves by the US and NATO.  The best response NATO and Washington could come up with was, ‘well, there was no official written promise.’  This is worthy of a street peddler selling counterfeit watches.  The leaders of the US, Britain, France, Belgium and Italy all lied.  Germany was caught between its honor and imminent reunification. So even its Chancellor Helmut Kohl had to go along with the West’s prevarications.

At the time, I wrote that the best solution would be for the demilitarization of formerly Soviet-controlled Eastern Europe.  NATO had no need or business to expand eastward.  Doing so would be a constant provocation to Russia, which regarded Eastern Europe as an essential defensive glacis against invasions from the West.

Now, with NATO forces on its western borders, Russia’s deepest fears have been realized.

Today, US military aircraft based on the coasts of Romania and Bulgaria, former Warsaw Pact members, probe Russian airspace over the Black Sea and the vital strategic port of Sevastopol.  Washington talks about arming chaotic Ukraine.   US and NATO troops are in the Baltic, on Russia’s northwestern borders.  Polish right-wingers are beating the war drums against Russia.

In 1990, KGB and CIA agreed to the principal of ‘not one inch’ eastward for NATO.  Former US ambassador to Moscow, Jack Matlock, confirms the same agreement. Gorbachev, who is denounced as a foolish idealist by many Russians, trusted the Western powers. He should have had a battalion of New York City garment district shyster lawyers to document his agreements in 1990.  He thought he was dealing with honest, honorable men, like himself.

Is it any wonder after this bait and switch diplomacy that Russia has no trust in the Western powers?  Moscow watches US-run NATO oozing ever eastwards. Today, Russia’s leaders firmly believe Washington’s ultimate plan is to tear apart Russia and reduce it to an impotent, pauper nation.  Two former Western leaders, Napoleon and Hitler, had similar plans.

_____________________________________________________________

Posted in Articles | Comments Off on “Sorry Chump, You Didn’t Have It In Writing”