Neocons, War Media Exploit the Dead of Ukraine Flight 752

You are only relevant when the election circus comes to town.

Social media produces idiots, know-nothings raging about Iran and how unfair it is when a US citizen is killed by people who want invaders and occupiers to leave their country, which was mostly destroyed by the USG and its corporate partners in crime.

The “Trump War Room,” a fitting name for a social media account posting faux patriotic hogwash, is not concerned about the million-plus Iraqis killed by the USG and its money-grubbing “national security” partners. 

Meanwhile, Mark Levin, masquerading as a constitutionalist, finds it very interesting that the CIA and USAID folks are disrupting and destabilizing Iran. 

Yes, Mark, it is very interesting when neocons and Zionists work covertly to destabilize countries, subvert elections, assassinate leaders, insert malware, organize violent demonstrations against the medieval mullahs for USG propaganda purposes, and wage relentless economic war, impoverishing millions. 

Political opportunists, such as the dynastically entitled one-time black-faced PM of Canada, are squeezing the shot-down Ukrainian airliner mishap for all it is worth, which isn’t much. 

From Global News: 

Trudeau spoke with Global National‘s Dawna Friesen on Monday about the Canadian response to the plane crash and the ongoing work happening to support the families, identify the victims, and hold Iran to account in the investigation into how the missile that took down the plane was fired.

Not much to investigate here. Iran, blinded by the fog of Israel and Trump’s war, accidentally shot down a civilian jetliner, same as the USG when it shot down Iran Air Flight 655 in 1988, killing 290 innocent civilians. The USS Vincennes lobbed a surface-to-air missile at the domestic aircraft while the warship sat parked in Iranian territorial waters. 

Flight 752 is receiving widespread coverage and has provided Israel and the United States with additional war propaganda talking points. Of course, there is no mention of Israel shooting down Libyan Flight 114 traveling from Tripoli to Cairo in 1973, killing 108 innocents. 

The US neocons, attached at birth to Israel and the Zionist agenda, hate Donald Trump so much they can’t bring themselves to admit he is the most pro-Zionist president in US history. 

Here is “Republican Leader and Representative of California’s 23rd District in the House of Representatives,” Kevin McCarthy. 

Common sense, Mr. McCarthy, would dictate you call for the removal of our troops from the Middle East, the end of the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, and an end to the sort of mass murder you and your fellow corporate crony serving colleagues support without consulting the people you supposedly represent. 

iran_response

But then both “conservative” and “liberal” statists follow national security state marching orders handed down from above, and the American people—who do the fighting and dying in addition to paying the bills—are only relevant when the election circus comes to town.

Israel never gets tired of demanding Americans pay for wars that have zero benefit for the American people and in fact diminish their security as the victims seek retribution (as demonstrated by the death of the US contractor mentioned above). 

The “Jewish state” never gets tired of fear tactics or coming off like the boy who cried wolf, claiming Iran will nuke the entire world if the neocon-dominated USG war machine doesn’t flatten the country like it did Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and Syria.

It is, naturally, antisemitic to point out the truth—these are wars for Israel and they have zero benefit for America. 

In a perfect world, the USG would have never invented atomic weapons, thus motivating everybody else to develop and deploy nukes (in Israel’s case, by stealing the technology). This includes Iran. It knows that if it has deployable nuclear weapons, Israel and the US will be far less likely to invade. 

It should not come as a surprise that the Silicon Valley warmongers, masquerading as touchy-feely liberals and progressives, are busy shutting down any opposition to the ongoing plan to get a war going against Iran. This includes not only antiwar citizens but the leaders of target countries not allowed to voice concern and opposition to the invasion of their nations and the mass murder that will ensue. 

Khamenei is not alone—there are thousands of us cut-off from social media for the crime of calling out the warmongers. The next war will march forward emboldened by neocon lies and without the threat of serious resistance by the commoners, debt-serfs who will be forced at gunpoint to pay for endless war and be expected to quietly and without complaint bury the dead. 

Inner Party member O’Brien would be proud. 

creatdive commons by-sa_RGB-350x122

Neocon: Trump “Misunderstood” On War to Destroy Syria

Envoy for destruction of Syria clarifies.

“The United States’ special representative for Syria has defended the controversial decision by President Donald Trump to withdraw troops from the Middle Eastern country and declare that the war against the so-called Islamic State had been won,” Trump’s envoy to Syria, James Jeffrey, told the German newspaper, Deutsche Welle. 

Jeffrey is Trump’s the United States Special Representative for Syria Engagement (sic) and the Special Envoy for the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIL.

Talking to DW’s Conflict Zone host Tim Sebastian in Washington, Ambassador James Jeffrey rejected the idea that Trump’s decision had been costly and misleading, and instead said the president had been “misunderstood.”

“President Trump made it clear at the time to us and to other leaders that he wasn’t losing the bubble, as we say, on the fight against ISIS, which he recognized could reconstitute itself,” Jeffrey said.

Not “losing the bubble” means US troops must remain in Syria, a direct violation of that nation’s national sovereignty and a threat to its very existence. 

Trump’s message was unmistakable. He wanted to remove troops in Syria. It would appear he had a good talking to by his neocon-CFR advisers and possibly his good friends in Israel—all advised him to stay the course, lest the Pentagon ISIS experiment in destabilization fades away, or is defeated by the Syrians.

The objective has not changed—the wholesale destruction of Syria, balkanized into ethnic enclaves, large chunks swallowed up by Israel and Turkey. The “rebels” (Wahhabi mercenaries) would like nothing better than to give Bashar al-Assad the Gaddafi treatment. 

Trump, like a puppet on a string, turned around and said he wouldn’t pull troops out of Syria. He misspoke or was misunderstood (a common occurrence with this president). 

Our “God-blessed” troops will remain, or at least some of them will never mind the government routinely lies and misleads about troops numbers occupying foreign lands. It also lies about how many innocents it has slaughtered. This is nothing new. The state has done as much at least since the Vietnam War. 

Jeffrey offered the stale neocon explanation why troops should remain, never mind the violation of national sovereignty and international law, let alone the completely avoidable death of hundreds of thousands of Syrians. 

Iran. 

“I don’t know of anybody in the US government at any level that does not think that Iran’s encroachment on the region, its hegemonic tendencies, its use of asymmetrical warfare throughout the region … is not at the very top of the threats to regional security,” he said. 

Jeffrey is a visiting fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), a member of the CIA External Advisory Board, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. This explains everything you need to know. 

WINEP is a spin-off the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the fiercely pro-Israel driver of US foreign policy in the Middle East. Like its predecessor, WINEP holds an inexplicable voodoo trance grip on Congress and relentlessly pushes the bomb Iran and destroy Syria mantra, two key objectives of the Zionists in Israel and the Israel-first neocons at home. A massive chorus of ideologically lobotomized Christian Zionists serves as cheerleaders. They foolishly believe all Jews will be Christianized after the Final Battle and Return of the Messiah, the Jew Jesus of Nazareth, who is detested by many Jews. 

Let’s face it. Trump is connected at the hip to Israel. His daughter has converted to Orthodox Judaism and her husband is a wealthy Jew who approves of Israel stealing Palestinian land, running off its residents with bullets and truncheons, and shooting Palestinians protesting their captivity in the Gaza open-air prison by shooting them dead or, when the media cringes, deciding it is more effective to hobble them for life by shooting them in the ankles.

President Clueless and Confused is yanked back and forth like the tide. One day he says the neocon wars in the Middle East are a waste of lives and money—and then the next day says he will respond to Iranians defending themselves with overwhelming military action. 

The neocons—following orders from Zionists in Israel and at home—are attempting to restart the “rebel” (cutthroat jihadist mercenary) effort to oust al-Assad and establish a Wahhabi caliphate taking orders from Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the US. So blinded by their absurd medieval religion, these criminal jihadi psychopaths are only dimly aware they are useful idiots. 

That plan—long ago put together by Zionists as part of the Greater Israel project—will not be allowed to fade into the fog of soon forgotten history. Trump vacillates too much for their liking. 

The next president may not be as reluctant and indecisive about killing people. Certainly not Hillary Clinton, who will soon enter the field of Democrat hopefuls. She has broad experience—and a psychopathic personality to go along with it. Clinton is, after all, not shy about condoning and facilitating murder. She chortled on national television about accomplishing the brutal and sadistic murder of Libya’s Gaddafi. 

If she runs and captures the nomination, supposedly Republican (before that Democrats, and before that, Trotskyites) neocons will march to the polls to pull the lever in the hope Israel’s wars will not end until the entire Arab, Persian, and Muslim Middle East is cowed, irreparably harmed, its infrastructure and mosques in ruins, and the people divided into mutually antagonistic balkanized vassal states. 

creatdive commons by-sa_RGB-350x122

Trump Replaces Bolton with Fringe Neocon

Neocons have firm grip on clueless president.

It was too good to be true. For a moment, I actually thought Trump had come to his senses and decided to scour the neocons from his administration.

I was overly optimistic. I should have known better.

Back in 2016, I wrote a small ebook about the neocons giving Trump advice during his presidential campaign. I focused on the influence of Frank Gaffney, founder of the Islamophobic Center for Security Policy (CSP).

Trump’s interim national security adviser, Charles Kupperman, was John Bolton’s sidekick. He is associated with CSP and its pro-Israel, anti-Iran, Islamophobic agenda. 

Kupperman is neck-deep in the military-industrial complex. He held senior positions at Lockheed Martin and Boeing. I’m sure Trump approves, having acted as a salesman for the death merchants. He used the ineffectual and illegal missile strike on Syria as a PR event. 

For now, Kupperman is interim national security adviser. Trump is looking at equally unqualified warmongers to eventually fill the slot. For instance, Brian Hook, Trump’s Special Representative for Iran and Senior Policy Advisor to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. 

Hook co-founded the John Hay Initiative—named after President Theodore Roosevelt’s chief diplomat—a concerted effort to brainwash politicians and their staffs in the neocon way of doing things. Advisers include the high-level neocon Robert Kagan, former Dick Cheney adviser Eric Edelman, “the most influential neocon in academe,” Eliot Cohen, former Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, former NSA director Michael Hayden, and a host of others.

The list of insiders and neocons considered to replace Bolton is lengthy. The list of potentials includes Frederick Fleitz, a former CIA analyst and the president and CEO of CSP. He served as chief of staff to Undersecretaries of State for Arms Control John Bolton during the Bush regime. 

Trump is clueless. At first glance, it appeared the president may have tried to dampen the influence of the neocons on his disastrous foreign policy, but this assessment is far too optimistic. He fired Bolton—who said he resigned—because the mustachioed neocon disagreed and argued with Trump over hosting the Taliban at Camp David. Bolton and the neocons are not interested in peace, they’re masters of forever war. 

It was personal for Trump, as always. 

The neocons will continue to leverage their influence within the administration and Trump will continue to fire those who argue too vociferously. 

creatdive commons by-sa_RGB-350x122

Adieu, John Bolton

Trump finally has had enough of this warmongering neocon.

President Trump has finally fired his neocon national security adviser, John Bolton. 

The decision to show Bolton the door came after Trump suggested a meeting between himself and the Taliban at Camp David. 

As should be expected, Bolton strongly disagreed—the idea runs counter to the neocon vision of US foreign policy—and Trump, being Trump, fired him. 

Rumor has it Trump will talk to Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, although the Iranians say they will not talk with Trump until sanctions are lifted. For the neocons, the mere idea of talking to the mullahs or engaging any kind of diplomacy with Iran is unacceptable heresy. They’d rather kill Iranians than talk with them. 

The latest game of musical chairs at the White House underscores the fact Donald Trump has absolutely no idea what he is doing. 

If, as claimed during the campaign, Trump wants to shut down the wars and bring home the troops, why did he hire one of the most violent and scurrilous of neocons to advise him on foreign policy, a guy who penned a New York Times op-ed calling for bombing Iran as a response to its nonexistent nuclear weapons program? 

The Taliban were created and nurtured into power by the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI. Phil Gasper writes: 

The U.S. government was well aware of the Taliban’s reactionary program, yet it chose to back their rise to power in the mid-1990s. The creation of the Taliban was “actively encouraged by the ISI and the CIA,” according to Selig Harrison, an expert on U.S. relations with Asia. “The United States encouraged Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to support the Taliban, certainly right up to their advance on Kabul,” adds respected journalist Ahmed Rashid. When the Taliban took power, State Department spokesperson Glyn Davies said that he saw “nothing objectionable” in the Taliban’s plans to impose strict Islamic law, and Senator Hank Brown, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Near East and South Asia, welcomed the new regime: “The good part of what has happened is that one of the factions at last seems capable of developing a new government in Afghanistan.” “The Taliban will probably develop like the Saudis. There will be Aramco [the consortium of oil companies that controlled Saudi oil], pipelines, an emir, no parliament and lots of Sharia law. We can live with that,” said another U.S. diplomat in 1997.

That was before 9/11 and the creation of another CIA asset, Osama bin Laden. Neocons rife in the Bush administration decided the Taliban would represent in part the new face of radical Islamic evil, never mind the previous stance of the US government that the Taliban would become good friends like the Saudis. 

The Bush invasion of Afghanistan was planned before the 9/11 attack, as former Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice admitted during testimony before the 9/11 commission.

Moreover, the US set aside terrorism investigations of al-Qaeda and the Taliban at the behest of transnational oil corporations. 

From Julio Godoy of Inter Press Service:

Under the influence of U.S. oil companies, the government of George W. Bush initially blocked U.S. secret service investigations on terrorism, while it bargained with the Taliban the delivery of Osama bin Laden in exchange for political recognition and economic aid, two French intelligence analysts claim… They affirm that until August [2001], the U.S. government saw the Taliban regime ”as a source of stability in Central Asia that would enable the construction of an oil pipeline across Central Asia”, from the rich oilfields in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan, through Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the Indian Ocean.

The invasion of Afghanistan had little to do with Osama bin Laden—the Taliban said they would turn him over if his role in 9/11 could be proven—but rather the illegal invasion was part of a plan before 9/11 to secure the impoverished country for an oil pipeline and a hunt for minerals, thus the deal with the Taliban disappeared under a rain of bombs and a deadly fog of depleted uranium. 

It was reported that one US official proclaimed during negotiation with the Taliban: “either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs.”

On October 14, 2001, The Guardian reported:

In Jalalabad, deputy prime minister Haji Abdul Kabir—the third most powerful figure in the ruling Taliban regime—told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US, but added: “we would be ready to hand him over to a third country.” 

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky brings the real objective of the invasion into focus.

The economic dimensions of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT) are rarely mentioned. The post 9/11 “counter-terrorism campaign” has served to obfuscate the real objectives of the US-NATO war.

The war on Afghanistan is part of a profit-driven agenda: a war of economic conquest and plunder,  “a resource war”.

While Afghanistan is acknowledged as a strategic hub in Central Asia, bordering on the former Soviet Union, China and Iran, at the crossroads of pipeline routes and major oil and gas reserves, its huge mineral wealth as well as its untapped natural gas reserves have remained, until June 2010, totally unknown to the American public.

According to a joint report by the Pentagon, the US Geological Survey (USGS) and USAID, Afghanistan is now said to possess “previously unknown” and untapped mineral reserves, estimated authoritatively to be of the order of one trillion dollars (New York Times, U.S. Identifies Vast Mineral Riches in Afghanistan – NYTimes.com, June 14, 2010, See also BBC, 14 June 2010).

John Bolton and the neocons are largely responsible for the numerous wars and violations of international law. They have managed to keep the US in what appears to be an endless war against Wahhabi-inspired fanatics (created by US and Pakistani intelligence). 

President Trump wants something else—to be at the center of a historic peace deal ending the longest war in American history—and Bolton was jettisoned due to his disagreement and sticking to his neocon principles, if they can be termed such. 

creatdive commons by-sa_RGB-350x122

Steve Bannon, China, and the Committee on the Present Danger 4.0

A transition from Islamic to Chinese enemies.

Steve Bannon is making himself useful. According to The New York Times, he has rekindled the paranoiac fire that fed the Cold War military-industrial complex and stoked red hysteria far and wide.

This is the fourth iteration of the Committee on the Present Danger. The first committee was originally formed in 1950 and produced the founding document of the manufactured Cold War—NSC-68, written by Paul Nitze. 

He later wrote the Gaither Report. It argued that “nuclear deterrence”—including the insane idea of a nuclear first strike—was more important than protecting the public from a nuclear war through diplomacy, treaty, and the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction. Members of Nitze’s anti-detente group ended up in the Reagan administration.

Following Bush’s Afghanistan and Iraq invasions and the commencement of the never-ending war on terror, the third CPD was formed and began a process of neoconization with the inclusion of Joe Lieberman, former CIA boss James Woolsey, neocon ideologue Laurie Mylroie, neocon founder Norman Podhoretz, Islamophobe Frank Gaffney, AEI adjunct fellow Danielle Pletka, and other associates of the American Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation, American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, and the Boeing Company (see this web archived page).

The fourth and current iteration was established in March. It includes Bannon. The vice-chairman, remarkably, is the fringe neocon Frank Gaffney. CFR member and Claremont Institute fellow Mark Helprin, former CIA spook Clare Lopez, the aforementioned Woolsey, and Jianli Yang are also members. Yang is a mascot of sorts for the revived CPD’s anti-China agenda. He is said to be a survivor of the Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989. 

From the current CPD website:

“The Committee on the Present Danger: China” is a wholly-independent and non-partisan effort to educate and inform American citizens and policymakers about the existential threats presented from the Peoples Republic of China under the misrule of the Chinese Communist Party. Its purpose is to explain these threats that range from: the PRC’s accelerating military buildup; its active information and political warfare that targets the American people and our business, political and media elites; cyber warfare; and, economic warfare. 

In other words, the latest CPD is little different than its predecessors. It is primarily a propaganda apparatus to transition the forever war state away from past enemies—the Soviet Union, Islamic terrorism—and focus hysteria on a new and much more formidable enemy. 

Thus the need for even more military spending and the manufacture of outrageously expensive weapons systems—the F-35 boondoggle, Hellfire missiles, expeditionary seas bases, space-based weapons, missile systems galore, littoral combat ships, attack helicopters, etc., ad nauseam. 

creatdive commons by-sa_RGB-350x122

Iran: The Technicolor War

After a tsunami of skepticism swept over the media following the Pentagon’s release of a dubious video supposedly showing Iranians removing a mine from the hull of a tanker, the generals followed up with a color version of basically the same video. Like the first video, the second color video doesn’t show much of anything.  Continue reading “Iran: The Technicolor War”