- Articles & Co
- Articles & Columns
- DAV KRANZLER
- Dave Kranzeler
- Dave Kranzler
- Dave Krasnzeler
- David Swanson
- farewell address
- Finian Cunningham
- Foster Gamble
- GUEST CONTRIBUITIONS
- Guest Contributions
- Guest Contributors
- Mikhail Gorbachev
- Paul Craig Roberts
- Storm Clouds Gathering
- The Saker
- VLADIMIR PUTIN
Monday, May 29, 2017
The American President Has No Policies
May 28, 2017
The American President Has No Policies
Assad of Syria
“The American President has no policies. There are policies drawn by the American institutions which control the American regime which are the intelligence agencies, the Pentagon, the big arms and oil companies, and financial institutions, in addition to some other lobbies which influence American decision-making. The American President merely implements these policies, and the evidence is that when Trump tried to move on a different track, during and after his election campaign, he couldn’t. He came under a ferocious attack. As we have seen in the past few week, he changed his rhetoric completely and subjected himself to the terms of the deep American state, or the deep American regime. That’s why it is unrealistic and a complete waste of time to make an assessment of the American President’s foreign policy, for he might say something; but he ultimately does what these institutions dictate to him. This is not new. This has been ongoing American policy for decades.”
Syria’s Assad Just Explained How The U.S. Really Works
By Brandon Turbeville
May 27, 2017 "Information Clearing House" - While Americans endlessly battle each other over seemingly important choices like Clinton and Trump or Democrats and Republicans, it is clear that the majority of the population has little understanding of how the U.S. government operates. Yet, for those who pay the price for the apathy and confusion of the general population of the West, it often becomes stunningly obvious that neither presidents nor political parties in America represent any discernible difference in the ongoing agenda of the Deep State and the rest of the oligarchical apparatus. Indeed, that agenda always marches forward regardless of who is president or which political party is in control.
JFK Was A Traitor To The National Security State
JFK Was A Traitor To The National Security State
The Obsession With Russian Goes Back Decades
By Jacob G. Hornberger
May 27, 2017 "Information Clearing House" - Just consider the accusations that have been leveled at the president:
- He has betrayed the Constitution, which he swore to uphold.
- He has committed treason by befriending Russia and other enemies of America.
- He has subjugated America’s interests to Moscow.
- He has been caught in fantastic lies to the American people, including personal ones, like his previous marriage and divorce.
President Donald Trump?
No, President John F. Kennedy.
What lots of Americans don’t realize, because it was kept secret from them for so long, is that what Trump has been enduring from the national-security establishment, the mainstream press, and the American right-wing for his outreach to, or “collusion with,” Russia pales compared to what Kennedy had to endure for committing the heinous “crime” of reaching out to Russia and the rest of the Soviet Union in a spirit of peace and friendship.
They hated him for it. They abused him. They insulted him. They belittled him. They called him naïve. They said he was a traitor.
All of the nasties listed above, plus more, were contained in an advertisement and a flier that appeared in Dallas on the morning of November 22, 1963, the day that Kennedy was assassinated. They can be read here and here.
Ever since then, some people have tried to make it seem like the advertisement and flier expressed only the feelings of extreme right-wingers in Dallas. That’s nonsense. They expressed the deeply held convictions of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the CIA, the conservative movement, and many people within the mainstream media and Washington establishment.
In June 1963, Kennedy threw down the gauntlet in a speech he delivered at American University, now entitled the “Peace Speech.” It was one of the most remarkable speeches ever delivered by an American president. It was broadcast all across the communist Soviet Union, the first time that had ever been done.
In the speech, Kennedy announced that he was bringing an end to the Cold War and the mindset of hostility toward Russia and the rest of the Soviet Union that the U.S. national-security establishment had inculcated in the minds of the American people ever since the end of World War II.
It was a radical notion and, as Kennedy well understood, a very dangerous one insofar as he was concerned. The Cold War against America’s World War II partner and ally had been used to convert the United States from a limited-government republic to a national-security state, one consisting of a vast, permanent military establishment, the CIA, and the NSA, along with their broad array of totalitarian-like powers, such as assassination, regime change, coups, invasions, torture, surveillance, and the like. Everyone was convinced that the Cold War — and the so-called threat from the international communist conspiracy that was supposedly based in Russia — would last forever, which would naturally mean permanent and ever-increasing largess for what Kennedy’s predecessor, President Dwight Eisenhower, had called the “military-industrial complex.”
Suddenly, Kennedy was upending the Cold War apple cart by threatening to establish a relationship of friendship and peaceful coexistence with Russia, the rest of the Soviet Union, and Cuba.
Kennedy knew full well that his actions were considered by some to be a grave threat to “national security.” After all, don’t forget that it was Guatemalan President Jacobo Arbenz’s outreach to the Soviets in a spirit of friendship that got him ousted from power by the CIA and presumably targeted for assassination as part of that regime-change operation. It was Cuban leader Fidel Castro’s outreach to the Soviets in a spirit of friendship that made him the target of Pentagon and CIA regime-change operations, including through invasion, assassination, and sanctions. It was Congo leader’s Patrice Lamumba’s outreach to the Soviets in a spirit of friendship that got him targeted for assassination by the CIA. It would be Chilean President Salvador Allende’s outreach to the Soviets in a spirit of friendship that got him targeted in a CIA-instigated coup in Chile that resulted in Allende’s death.
Kennedy wasn’t dumb. He knew what he was up against. He had heard Eisenhower warn the American people in his Farewell Address about the dangers to their freedom and democratic way of life posed by the military establishment. After Kennedy had read the novel Seven Days in May, which posited the danger of a military coup in America, he asked friends in Hollywood to make it into a movie to serve as a warning to the American people. In the midst of the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the Pentagon and the CIA were exerting extreme pressure on Kennedy to bomb and invade Cuba, his brother Bobby told a Soviet official with whom he was negotiating that the president was under a severe threat of being ousted in a coup. And, of course, Kennedy was fully mindful of what had happened to Arbenz, Lamumba, and Castro for doing what Kennedy was now doing — reaching out to the Soviets in a spirit of friendship.
In the eyes of the national-security establishment, one simply did not reach out to Russia, Cuba, or any other “enemy” of America. Doing so, in their eyes, made Kennedy an appeaser, betrayer, traitor, and a threat to “national security.”
Kennedy didn’t stop with his Peace Speech. He also began negotiating a treaty with the Soviets to end above-ground nuclear testing, an action that incurred even more anger and ire within the Pentagon and the CIA. Yes, that’s right — they said that “national security” depended on the U.S. government’s continuing to do what they object to North Korea doing today — conducting nuclear tests, both above ground and below ground.
Kennedy mobilized public opinion to overcome fierce opposition in the military, CIA, Congress, and the Washington establishment to secure passage of his Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
He then ordered a partial withdrawal of troops from Vietnam, and told close aides that he would order a complete pull-out after winning the 1964 election. In the eyes of the U.S. national-security establishment, leaving Vietnam subject to a communist takeover would pose a grave threat to national security here in the United States.
Worst of all, from the standpoint of the national-security establishment, Kennedy began secret personal negotiations with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev and Cuban leader Fidel Castro to bring an end to America’s Cold War against them. That was considered to be a grave threat to “national security” as well as a grave threat to all the military and intelligence largess that depended on the Cold War.
By this time, Kennedy’s war with the national-security establishment was in full swing. He had already vowed to tear the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds after its perfidious conduct in the Bay of Pigs fiasco. By this time, he had also lost all confidence in the military after it proposed an all-out surprise nuclear attack on the Soviet Union, much as Japan had done at Pearl Harbor, after the infamous plan known as Operation Northwoods, which proposed terrorist attacks and plane hijackings carried out by U.S. agents posing as Cuban communists, so as to provide a pretext for invading Cuba, and after the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the military establishment accused him of appeasement and treason for agreeing not to ever invade Cuba again.
What Kennedy didn’t know was that his “secret” negotiations with the Soviet and Cuban communists weren’t so secret after all. As it turns out, it was a virtual certainty that the CIA (or NSA) was listening in on telephone conversations of Cuban officials at the UN in New York City, much as the CIA and NSA still do today, during which they would have learned what the president was secretly doing behind their backs.
Kennedy’s feelings toward the people who were calling him a traitor for befriending Moscow and other “enemies” of America? In response to the things that were said in that advertisement and flier about him being a traitor for befriending Russia, he told his wife Jackie on the morning he was assassinated: “We are heading into nut country today.” Of course, as he well knew, the nuts weren’t located only in Dallas. They were also situated throughout the U.S. national-security establishment.
For more information, attend The Future of Freedom Foundation’s one-day conference on June 3, 2017, entitled “The National Security State and JFK” at the Washington Dulles Marriott Hotel.
Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education.
This article was first published by The Future of Freedom Foundation -
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.
Hard Conclusive Evidence That The US Government Is In A Conspiracy Against The
Conclusive Evidence That The US Government Is In A Conspiracy Against The
Sunday, May 28, 2017
The Mystery of the Ever Present Terrorist Passport
May 27, 2017
The Mystery of the Ever Present Terrorist Passport
This article reviews the “mysterious” phenomenon of IDs and Passports of terror suspects routinely discovered (often in the rubble) in the wake of a terrorist attack.
More from Guest Contributions ↓
Thursday, May 25, 2017
Cover Stories Are Used To Control Explanations
Cover Stories Are Used To Control Explanations
Paul Craig Roberts
Years ago James Jesus Angleton left me with the impression that when an intelligence agency, such as the CIA, pulls off an assassination, bombing, or any event with which the agency does not wish to be associated, the agency uses the media to control the explanation by quickly putting into place a cover story that, along with several others, has been prepared in advance. I suggested that the new story that “the Saudis did 9/11” was put into play to take the place of the worn and battered first cover story. http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/07/20/is-the-saudi-911-story-part-of-the-deception-paul-craig-roberts/
When the Oswald cover story for JFK’s assassination came under heavy suspicion http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/05/24/jfk-100-paul-craig-roberts/, other cover stories appeared in the media. One was that the Mafia killed JFK, because he was having affairs with their molls.
The fact that it made no sense did not stop many from believing it. It did not occur to people more gullible than thoughtful that a gangster would simply get another woman and not take the risk of assassinating the US president over a woman. The last thing the Mafia would want would be for Attorney General Robert Kennedy to bring the law down on the Mafia like a ton of bricks.
Another cover story was that Castro did it. This made even less sense. JFK had nixed the Joint Chiefs/CIA plan to invade Cuba, and he had refused air cover to the CIA’s Bay of Pigs invasion. JFK would certainly not be on Castro’s hit list.
Another cover story was that Lyndon Johnson was behind Kennedy’s assassination. As I wrote, there is no doubt that LBJ covered up the Joint Chiefs/CIA/Secret Service plot against JFK, as any president would have done, because the alternative was to destroy the American people’s confidence in the US military and security agencies. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court also covered up the plot, as did the Warren Commission, the media, and the Congress.
The “Johnson did it” story is the most preposterous of all. The Joint Chiefs, CIA, Secret Service, Chief Justice, Congress, and Media are not going to participate in the murder of a President and its coverup just for the sake of the VP’s personal ambition. The idea that so many strong institutions would permit a VP to murder a President for no reason other than the personal ambition of the VP is beyond absurdity.
Speaking of cover stories, I wonder if that is what we are witnessing in the leaked information to the New York Times about the Manchester Bombing. The only point of the leak is to set the story in place. The British complaints about the leaked information serve to disguise the leak’s purpose.
Setting a story in place early crowds out other explanations. Remember, the government claims to have had no warning of 9/11 but knew instantly who did it and set the story in place. The same for the Paris events, the Nice event, the Boston Marathon bombing, and I think all the others.
Authorities quickly come up with a story and names of those responsible. The alleged perpetrators or patsies, take your choice, are always dead and, thereby, unable to deny that they did it or say who put them up to it. The only exception that comes to mind is the younger brother who has been associated with the Boston Marathon bombing. Despite two police attempts to shoot him to death, he inconveniently survived, but has never been seen or heard from. As his orchestrated trial, his court appointed attorney confessed for him, and the jury convicted on her confession.
Remember, Oswald was shot dead by Jack Ruby before Oswald was questioned by police. There is no explanation for an armed private citizen being inside the jail with Oswald and positioned to shoot him at close range. Clearly, Oswald was not to be permitted to give his story. And no patsie since has either.
Wednesday, May 24, 2017
JFK at 100 — Paul Craig Roberts
JFK at 100
Paul Craig Roberts
This Memorial Day, Monday, May 29, 2017, is the 100th birthday of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States.
JFK was assassinated on November 22, 1963, as he approached the end of his third year in office. Researchers who spent years studying the evidence have concluded that President Kennedy was assassinated by a conspiracy between the CIA, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Secret Service.
Kennedy entered office as a cold warrior, but he learned from his interaction with the CIA and Joint Chiefs that the military/security complex had an agenda that was self-interested and a danger to humanity. He began working to defuse tensions with the Soviet Union. His rejections of plans to invade Cuba, of the Northwoods project, of a preemptive nuclear attack on the Soviet Union, and his intention to withdraw from Vietnam after his reelection, together with some of his speeches signaling a new approach to foreign policy in the nuclear age (see for example, https://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/BWC7I4C9QUmLG9J6I8oy8w.aspx ), convinced the military/security complex that he was a threat to their interests. Cold War conservatives regarded him as naive about the Soviet Threat and a liability to US national security. These were the reasons for his assassination. These views were set in stone when Kennedy announced on June 10, 1963, negotiations with the Soviets toward a nuclear test ban treaty and a halt to US atmospheric nuclear tests.
The Oswald coverup story never made any sense and was contradicted by all evidence including tourist films of the assassination. President Johnson had ro cover up the assassination, not because he was part of it or because he willfully wanted to deceive the American people, but because to give Americans the true story would have shaken their confidence in their government at a critical time in US-Soviet relations. To make the coverup succeed, Johnson needed the credibility of the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, Earl Warren, to chair the commission that covered up the assassination. Warren understood the devastating impact the true story would have on the public and their confidence in the military and national security leadership and on America’s allies.
As I previously reported, Lance deHaven-Smith in his book, Conspiracy Theory in America, shows that the CIA introduced “conspiracy theory” into the political lexicon as a technique to discredit skepticism of the Warren Commission’s coverup report. He provides the CIA document that describes how the agency used its media friends to control the explanation.
The term “conspiracy theory” has been used ever since to validate false explanations by discrediting true explanations.
President Kennedy was also determined to require the Israel Lobby to register as a foreign agent and to block Israel’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. His assassination removed the constraints on Israel’s illegal activities. http://www.voltairenet.org/article178401.html
Memorial Day is when Americans honor those in the armed services who died serving the country. JFK fell while serving the causes of peace and nuclear disarmament. In a 1961 address to the United Nations, President Kennedy said:
“Today, every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the day when this planet may no longer be inhabitable. Every man, woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by accident or miscalculation or by madness. The weapons of war must be abolished before they abolish us. It is therefore our intention to challenge the Soviet Union, not to an arms race, but to a peace race – to advance together step by step, stage by stage, until general and complete disarmament has been achieved.”
Kennedy’s address was well received at home and abroad and received a favorable and supportive response from Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, but it caused consternation among the warhawks in the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The US led in terms of the number of nuclear warheads and delivery systems, and this lead was the basis for US military plans for a surprise nuclear attack on the Soviet Union. http://prospect.org/article/did-us-military-plan-nuclear-first-strike-1963 Also, Many believed that nuclear disarmament would remove the obstacle to the Soviet Army overrunning Western Europe. Warhawks considered this a greater threat than nuclear armageddon. Many in high military circles regarded President Kennedy as weakening the US viv-a-vis the Soviet Union.
The assassination of President Kennedy was an enormous cost to the world. Kennedy and Khrushchev would have followed up their collaboration in defusing the Cuban Missile Crisis by ending the Cold War long before the military/security complex achieved its iron grip on the US government. Israel would have been denied nuclear weapons, and the designation of the Israel Lobby as a foreign agent would have prevented Israel’s strong grip on the US government. In his second term, JFK would have broken the CIA into a thousand pieces, an intention he expressed to his brother, Robert, and the Deep State would have been terminated before it became more powerful than the President.
But the military/security complex struck first, and pulled off a coup that voided all these promises and terminated American democracy.
Tuesday, May 23, 2017
Truth Has Become Un-American
Truth Has Become Un-American
Paul Craig Roberts
Those of us who have exited The Matrix are concerned that there are no checks on Washington’s use of nuclear weapons in the interest of US hegemony over the world.
Washington and Israel are the threats to peace. Washington demands world hegemony, and Israel demands hegemony in the Middle East.
There are two countries that stand in the way of Washington’s world hegemony—Russia and China. Consequently, Washington has plans for preemptive nuclear strikes against both countries. It is difficult to imagine a more serious threat to mankind, and there is no awareness or acknowledgment of this threat among the Congress, the presstitute media, and the general public in the United States and Washington’s European vassal populations.
Two countries and a part of a third stand in the way of Greater Israel. Israel wants the water resources of southern Lebanon, but cannot get them, despite twice sending in the Israeli Army, because of the Lebanese Hezbollah militia, which is supplied by Syria and Iran. This is why Syria and Iran are on Washington’s hit list. Washington serves the military/security complex, Wall Street and the over-sized US banks, and Israel.
It is unclear if the Russians and Chinese understand that Washington’s hostility toward them is not just some sort of misunderstanding that diplomacy can work out.
Clearly, Russia hasn’t interfered in the US presidential election or invaded Ukraine, and does not intend to invade Poland or the Baltics. Russia let go the Soviet empire and is glad to see it gone, as the empire was expensive and of little benefit. The Soviet Eastern European empire comprised Stalin’s buffer against another Western invasion. The Warsaw Pact had no offensive meaning. It was not the beginning, as misrepresented in Washington, of Soviet world domination.
I see a lack of clarity about the threat that Russia faces in Russian media reports and articles posted on Russian English language websites. I see a lack of clarity in Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov’s continued efforts to work out an accommodation with Washington. How can Lavrov work out an accommodation with Washington when Washington intends to dominate or isolate Russia?
Lavrov and Russian media organizations do not always show awareness that it is not Washington’s intention to accommodate other national interests.
It cannot be otherwise for these three reasons:
- The budget for the US military/security complex is the largest in the world. It is larger than the Gross Domestic Product of many countries. It includes not only the Pentagon’s budget but also the budgets of 16 US intelligence agencies and the Department of Energy, which is the location of the Oak Ridge nuclear weapons plant and 16 other national laboratories. When all the elements are added together, the military/security complex has annually the power and profit from $1,000 billion. An empire of this sort just doesn’t give up and go away because some president or some part of the electorate want peace. The “Russian Threat” is essential to the power and profit of the military/security complex, about which President Eisenhower warned Americans 56 years ago. Just imagine how entrenched this power is now.
- The neoconservatives, who control both US foreign policy and the Western media’s explanation of it, are mainly Jews of Zionist persuasion. Some are dual Israeli-US citizens. The neoconservatives believe that the collapse of Soviet communism means that History has chosen the United States as the socio-politico-economic system, and that the US government has the responsibility to assert the hegemony of America over the earth. Just read the neocon documents. They assert this over and over. This is what it means that America is the exceptional and indispensable nation. If you are the indispensable nation, every other nation is dispensable. If you are exceptional, everyone else is unexceptional. The claim that the neoconservatives make for the US is similar to the claim that Hitler made for Germany.
- As Israel controls US Middle East policy, Israel uses its control to have Washington eliminate obstacles to Israel’s expansion. So far Israel has achieved the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s government and chaos in Iraq, Washington’s war on Syria, and Washington’s demonization of Iran in the hope that sufficient demonization will justify war.
For the Russian Foreign Minister to believe that it is possible to reach an accommodation with Washington, other than a Russian surrender, is nonsense. Perhaps this is Lavrov’s use of diplomacy to delay the US attack while Russia prepares. Or perhaps Lavrov is just a diplomat who sticks to his last, despite the facts.
Much of the Russian media, both in Russian and foreign language broadcasts and websites, thinks that the Western misrepresentation of Russia is just a mistake and that that facts, once they are established, can rectify the mistake. These Russian journalists don’t understand that Washington could not care less about facts. Washington desperately needs an enemy, and Russia is the enemy of choice.
The Chinese government seems to think that Wall Street and US corporations are too dependent on the cheap Chinese manufacturing labor, which keeps the US system fueled with profits, to jeopardize these profits by going to war.
By underplaying the risk of war, Russia and China fail to mobilize world opposition to Washington’s recklessness and, thereby, enable Washington’s move toward war.
The presstitutes serving the National Security State continue to drive toward conflict. Consider Newsweek’s May 26, 2017, cover story with Putin on the cover and the caption:
“The Plot Against America: Inside Putin’s Campaign to Destroy Democracy in the U.S.”
It is difficult to imagine such ignorant nonsense from a mainstream news magazine. Democracy in America has been destroyed by special interest groups, by a US Supreme Court decision that gave the reins of power to special interest groups, and by a hoax war on terror that has destroyed the US Constitution. And here we have the presstitutes saying that Putin is destroying American democracy. Clearly, there is no extant intelligence anywhere in the Western media. The Western presstitutes are either corrupt beyond belief or ignorant beyond belief. Nothing else can be said for them.
Consider Time magazine’s cover. It depicts Trump turning the White House into the foundation for the Kremlin and St. Basil’s Cathedral, which rise above the White House, symbolizing America’s subservience to Russia under President Trump. This extraordinary propaganda seems to be readily accepted by the bulk of the Western populations, peoples who will die as a result of their insouciance.
Even writers critical of Washington, such as Paul Street’s recent article on CounterPunch and the English language Russian website, Strategic Culture Foundation, cannot bring themselves to state the truth that the US military/security complex needs a major enemy, has elected Russia for that role, and intends to defend this orchestration to the end of humanity on earth.
Street writes about “How Russia Became ‘Our Adversary’ Again.” According to Street, Russia became the enemy of choice because Russia protected part of the world’s population and resources from being exploited by global capital. Russia became the number one enemy of the US also because Putin stopped the American exploitation of Russia economically. Putin is in the way of Washington’s exploitation of the world.
Much of what Street says is correct, but he is hesitant to state it in a straightforward manner. He has to dilute his message by repeating the obligatory propaganda. Street calls Trump, who originally wanted normal relations with Russia, an “orange-haired brute . . . [who admires] Putin’s authoritarian manliness.”
Trump’s problems originated in his goal of normalizing relations with Russia. Hillary is the brute who intended to worsen the relations.
Putin is a democrat, not an authoritarian. The authoritarians are in Washington. Surely Paul Street and CounterPunch know this. But Street has to protect himself from speaking some politically incorrect truths about the US and Russia by throwing in some anti-Putin propaganda and denigrating President Trump.
That peace with Russia and China would undermine the justification of the $1,000 billion military/security budget, and that the military/security complex is the American government, is too much truth for most writers to state.
Truth is the most rare element in the Western world, and we will not be permitted to have much of it much longer. Increasingly, truth is difficult to find. Soak it up while it is still available.
Saturday, May 20, 2017
Are We Witnessing a Coup Operation Against the Trump White House?
Are We Witnessing a Coup Operation Against the Trump White House?
Friday, May 19, 2017
Το Βδέλυγμα Κυβερνάει την Ουάσιγκτον
Paul Craig Roberts
“Το πρόβλημα είναι ότι τόσο καιρό πια ο κόσμος ακούει τους Αμερικανούς γαμώτο” — Dr. Julian Osborne, από την έκδοση ταινίας του 2000 βασισμένη στο βιβλίο του Nevil Shute του 1957, On the Beach (Στην Παραλία)
Ρωτάει ένας αναγνώστης γιατί υποστηρίζουν οι νεοσυντηρητικοί τον πυρηνικό πόλεμο καθότι δεν γίνεται να υπάρχουν νικητές. Εάν όλοι πεθάνουν, ποιος ο λόγος;
Η απάντηση είναι ότι οι νεοσυντηρητικοί πιστεύουν στη νίκη των ΗΠΑ με το μικρότερο έως και μηδαμινό κόστος.
Το παρανοϊκό τους σχέδιο έχει ως εξής: Η Ουάσιγκτον θα περικυκλώσει τη Ρωσία και την Κίνα με βάσεις αντιβαλλιστικών πυραύλων προκειμένου να θωρακιστεί απέναντι σε ανταποδοτικό χτύπημα Ρωσίας και Κίνας. Επιπλέον, οι αντιβαλλιστικές αυτές βάσεις των ΗΠΑ μπορούν να εξαπολύσουν και πυρηνικούς πυραύλους άγνωστους σε Ρωσία και Κίνα, μειώνοντας έτσι τον χρόνο προειδοποίησης στα πέντε λεπτά, αφήνοντας στα θύματα της Ουάσιγκτον λίγο έως καθόλου χρόνου για να πάρουν αποφάσεις.
Οι νεοσυντηρητικοί πιστεύουν πως το πρώτο χτύπημα της Ουάσιγκτον θα καταστρέψει τόσο πολύ τον εξοπλισμό αντιποίνων της Ρωσίας και της Κίνας που και οι δύο αυτές κυβερνήσεις θα παραδοθούν αντί να ανταποδώσουν. Οι ηγέτες Ρωσίας και Κίνας θα καταλήξουν στο ότι οι περιορισμένες πια δυνάμεις τους δεν αφήνουν μεγάλα περιθώρια επιτυχίας στους διηπειρωτικούς βαλλιστικούς τους πυραύλους στο να διαπεράσουν την ασπίδα των αντιβαλλιστικών της Ουάσιγκτον, και έτσι η μεγαλύτερη επικράτεια των ΗΠΑ θα μείνει άθικτη. Τα αδύναμα αντίποινα της Ρωσίας και της Κίνας θα προκαλέσουν απλά ένα δεύτερο κύμα πυρηνικών επιθέσεων από τις ΗΠΑ που θα εξαφανίσουν τις Ρωσικές και Κινέζικες πόλεις, σκοτώνοντας εκατομμύρια κι αφήνοντας συντρίμμια και τις δύο χώρες.
Εν συντομία, οι Αμερικανοί πολεμοκάπηλοι στοιχηματίζουν ότι οι ηγέτες της Ρωσίας και της Κίνας θα παραδοθούν αντί να ρισκάρουν μιαν ολική καταστροφή.
Δεν το συζητάμε για το πόσο φθόνο μπορούν να έχουν οι νεοσυντηρητικοί έτσι ώστε να εξαπολύσουν μια κατά προτίμηση πυρηνική επίθεση, ενδεχομένως όμως το σχέδιό τους στοχεύει στο να θέσει τη Ρωσία και την Κίνα σε τέτοια κατάσταση ώστε οι ηγέτες τους να συμπεράνουν ότι χάνουν και, εξ αυτού, να αποδεχθούν την ηγεμονία της Ουάσιγκτον.
Για να αισθανθεί ασφαλής στην ηγεμονία της η Ουάσιγκτον, θα διατάξει τη Ρωσία και την Κίνα να αφοπλιστούν.
Το σχέδιο είναι γεμάτο διακινδυνεύσεις. Λανθασμένοι υπολογισμοί θα οδηγήσουν σε πόλεμο. Είναι απερίσκεπτη και ανεύθυνη η διακινδύνευση της ζωής του πλανήτη απλά για μια ηγεμονία της Ουάσιγκτον.
Το σχέδιο των νεοσυντηρητικών βάζει την Ευρώπη, το Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο, την Ιαπωνία, την Ν. Κορέα και την Αυστραλία σε μεγάλο κίνδυνο μπροστά σε πιθανά αντίποινα Ρωσίας και Κίνας. Η αντιβαλλιστική ασπίδα της Ουάσιγκτον δεν μπορεί να προστατεύσει την Ευρώπη από τους πυρηνικούς πυραύλους Κρουζ της Ρωσίας ή από την Πολεμική Αεροπορία της Ρωσίας, συνεπώς η Ευρώπη θα πάψει να υπάρχει. Τα αντίποινα της Κίνας θα χτυπήσουν Ιαπωνία, Ν. Κορέα και Αυστραλία.
Η Ρώσικη ευχή μαζί μ’ αυτήν όλων των σωφρόνων ανθρώπων είναι να καταλάβουν οι υποτελείς της Ουάσιγκτον ότι αυτοί είναι εκείνου που βάζουν τον εαυτό τους σε κίνδυνο, έναν κίνδυνο από τον οποίο δεν έχουν να κερδίσουν τίποτε αλλά να χάσουν τα πάντα, οπότε θα πρέπει να αποκηρύξουν την υποτέλειά τους προς την Ουάσιγκτον και να αποσύρουν τις βάσεις των ΗΠΑ. Θα πρέπει οι Ευρωπαίοι πολιτικοί να καταλάβουν ότι παρασύρονται σε σύρραξη με την Ρωσία. Ο διοικητής του ΝΑΤΟ είπε τη βδομάδα αυτή στο Κογκρέσο των ΗΠΑ πως χρειάζεται μεγαλύτερη χρηματοδότηση για ισχυρότερη στρατιωτική παρουσία στην Ευρώπη προκειμένου να αντιμετωπίσει την «αναζωπύρωση της Ρωσίας». https://www.rt.com/news/387063-nato-counter-resurgent-russia/
Ας εξετάσουμε τι σημαίνει «αναζωπυρωμένη Ρωσία». Σημαίνει ότι η Ρωσία είναι δυνατή και έχει αυτοπεποίθηση τέτοια ώστε να μπορεί να προασπίσει τα συμφέροντά της και αυτά των συμμάχων της. Η Ρωσία μπορούσε να μπλοκάρει τα σχέδια του Ομπάμα για εισβολή στη Συρία και βομβαρδισμό του Ιράν και να βοηθούσε τις στρατιωτικές δυνάμεις της Συρίας να νικήσουν τις δυνάμεις του ISIS που έστειλε ο Ομπάμα και η Χίλαρυ για να ανατρέψουν τον Ασσάντ.
Η Ρωσία έχει «αναζωπυρωθεί» γιατί η Ρωσία μπορεί να μπλοκάρει τις μονομερείς ενέργειες των ΗΠΑ ενάντια σε άλλες χώρες.
Η δυνατότητα αυτή σκάει σα φούσκα πάνω στα μούτρα του δόγματος Wolfowitz των νεοσυντηρητικών, σύμφωνα με το οποίο πρωτεύων στόχος της εξωτερικής πολιτικής των ΗΠΑ είναι η πρόληψη της ανόδου οποιασδήποτε χώρας προτού αυτή να μπορεί να σταματά τις μονομερείς ενέργειες της Ουάσιγκτον.
Καθόλη τη διάρκεια που οι νεοσυντηρητικοί ήταν βυθισμένοι μέσα στους ‘εύκολους’ πολέμους τους που έχουν ήδη συμπληρώσει 16 χρόνια, η Ρωσία και η Κίνα αναδείχθηκαν σε εμπόδια απέναντι στη μονομέρεια της Ουάσιγκτον, μια κατάσταση την οποία χαίρονταν από την κατάρρευση της Σοβιετικής Ένωσης. Αυτό που προσπαθεί να κάνει η Ουάσιγκτον είναι να ξαναβρεί την ικανότητά της να δρα παγκοσμίως και δίχως κανέναν περιορισμό από οποιοδήποτε άλλο κράτος. Κι αυτό απαιτεί από τη Ρωσία και την Κίνα να αποσυρθούν.
Σκοπεύουν όμως η Ρωσία και η Κίνα να αποσυρθούν; Παίζει, αλλά δεν ποντάρω τη ζωή του πλανήτη επάνω σ’ αυτό. Και οι δυο αυτές κυβερνήσεις διαθέτουν ηθική συνείδηση, κάτι που λείπει ολοκληρωτικά από την Ουάσιγκτον. Καμία από αυτές τις κυβερνήσεις δεν πτοείται από την προπαγάνδα της Δύσης. Ο Ρώσος Υπουργός Εξωτερικών Lavrov είπε χθες ότι ακούμε ασταμάτητα υστερικές κατηγορίες ενάντια στη Ρωσία, οι κατηγορίες όμως αυτές είναι πάντοτε άνευ αποδείξεων. https://sputniknews.com/politics/201705041053274379-lavrov-russia-us-relations/
Σαφέστατα, Ρωσία και Κίνα θα μπορούσαν να θυσιάσουν την κυριαρχία τους για χάρη της ζωής επάνω στη γη. Η ίδια όμως αυτή ηθική συνείδηση θα τους ωθήσει να αντιταχθούν στο κακό που λέγεται Ουάσιγκτον προκειμένου να μην υποκύψουν οι ίδιοι στο κακό αυτό. Συνεπώς, πιστεύω πως το κακό που κυβερνά την Ουάσιγκτον οδηγεί τις ΗΠΑ και τις υποτελείς της πολιτείες σε ολική καταστροφή.
Έχοντας πειστεί οι ηγέτες Ρωσίας και Κίνας πως η Ουάσιγκτον σκοπεύει να βομβαρδίσει με πυρηνικά τις χώρες τους με κάποια ξαφνική επίθεση (δείτε για παράδειγμα στο http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/04/us-forces-preparing-sudden-nuclear.html ), το ερώτημα είναι πώς θα ανταποκριθούν Ρωσία και Κίνα; Θα κάτσουν εκεί και θα περιμένουν να τους επιτεθούν, ή θα προλάβουν την επίθεση της Ουάσιγκτον με μια δική τους επίθεση;
Τι θα έκανες εσύ; Θα διαφύλαττες τη ζωή σου υποκύπτοντας στο κακό, η θα κατέστρεφες το κακό;
Καταγράφω αληθινά αποτελέσματα με το όνομά μου που αναγράφεται σε λίστες (επιδοτούνται από ποιόν;) ως ‘Ρώσος κορόιδο/πράκτορας’. Βασικά, είμαι ένας πράκτορας όλων των ανθρώπων εκείνων που αποδοκιμάζουν τη θέληση της Ουάσιγκτον στη χρήση πυρηνικού πολέμου προκειμένου να διασφαλίσει την ηγεμονία της στην υφήλιο, αλλά ας δούμε τι σημαίνει να είσαι ‘Ρώσος πράκτορας’.
Σημαίνει να σέβεσαι τους διεθνείς νόμους, που δεν το κάνει η Ουάσιγκτον. Σημαίνει να σέβεσαι τη ζωή, που δεν το κάνει η Ουάσιγκτον. Σημαίνει να σέβεσαι τα διεθνή συμφέροντα των άλλων χωρών, που δεν το κάνει η Ουάσιγκτον. Σημαίνει να αποκρίνεσαι στις προκλήσεις με διπλωματία και να ζητάς συνεργασία, που δεν το κάνει η Ουάσιγκτον. Όμως τα κάνει η Ρωσία. Ξεκάθαρα, ‘Ρώσος πράκτορας’ είναι ένα άτομο ηθικό που θέλει να διατηρήσει τη ζωή και την εθνική ταυτότητα και αξιοπρέπεια των άλλων ανθρώπων.
Η Ουάσιγκτον είναι αυτή που θέλει να αποτελειώσει την ανθρώπινη ηθική και να γίνει ο αφέντης του πλανήτη. Όπως έχω γράψει και παλιά, η Ουάσιγκτον το δίχως άλλο είναι το Βδέλυγμα. Το σημαντικότατο ερώτημα είναι εάν έμεινε αρκετό καλό μέσα στον κόσμο για να αντισταθεί και να υπερνικήσει το κακό της Ουάσιγκτον.
Βάσεις των ΗΠΑ Κοντά στη Ρωσία
Μετάφραση: Con Tanidis
2015 President - EN from Roberto Petitpas on Vimeo.
2015 President - PT from Roberto Petitpas on Vimeo.
AVAILABLE IN FRENCH, ROUMANIAN, PORTUGUESE
2017.03.10 Maria Zakharova - MFA Press Briefing - EN from Roberto Petitpas on Vimeo.