Croatian -- Sauron vlada u Washingtonu -- Paul Craig Roberts

5. svibnja 2017.

Sauron vlada u Washingtonu

Paul Craig Roberts

„Problem je što je svijet slušao Amerikance – Dr. Julian Osborne, iz verzije filma iz 2000-te godine. Iz knjige Nevila Shutea iz 1957. godine: Na plaži

Čitatelj je pitao zašto neokonzervativci guraju prema nuklearnom ratu kad on može biti bez pobjednika. Ako svi umru, gdje je poanta?

Odgovor je da neokonzervativci vjeruju da SAD može pobijediti s minimalnom ili čak s nikakvom štetom.

Njihov ludi plan je sljedeći: Washington će okružiti Rusiju i Kinu s antibalističkim raketnim bazama kako bi osigurao štit protiv uzvratnog udara iz Rusije i Kine. Uz to, ove američke antibalističke raketne baze također mogu uključiti rakete za nuklearni napad nepoznate Rusiji i Kini, čime se vrijeme upozorenja smanjuje na 5 minuta, ostavljajući žrtvama Washingtona malo ili nimalo vremena za donošenje odluke.

Neokonzervativci smatraju da će Washingtonov prvi udar tako ozbiljno oštetiti ruske i kineske sposobnosti odmazde da će se obje vlade predati, umjesto da lansiraju odgovor. Rusko i kinesko vodstvo bi zaključilo da njihove smanjene snage ostavljaju malo šanse da će mnogi njihovi ICBM biti u mogućnosti proći Washingtonov ABM štit, ostavljajući SAD uglavnom netaknutim. Slaba odmazda Rusije i Kine jednostavno bi prizvala drugi val američkog nuklearnog napada koji bi uništio ruske i kineske gradove, ubivši milijune ljudi i ostavljajući obje zemlje u ruševinama.

Ukratko, američki huškači rata klade se da će se rusko i kinesko vodstvo suzdržati umjesto da riskira totalno uništenje.

Nema sumnje da su neokonzervativci dovoljno zli da bi pokrenuli preventivni nuklearni napad, ali možda plan ima za cilj da stavi Rusiju i Kinu u situaciju u kojoj njihovi čelnici zaključuju da su karte poslagane protiv njih i stoga moraju prihvatiti hegemoniju Washingtona.

Da bi se osjećao sigurnim u svojoj hegemoniji, Washington bi trebao narediti Rusiji i Kini da se razoružaju. Ovaj plan je pun rizika. Pogrešne procjene su svojstvo rata. Neobuzdano je i neodgovorno riskirati život planeta za ništa više od hegemonije Washingtona.

Plan neokonzervativaca stavlja Europu, Veliku Britaniju, Japan, Sjevernu Koreju i Australiju u visoki rizik gdje će se Rusija i Kina osvetiti. Washingtonov ABM štit ne može zaštititi Europu od ruskih nuklearnih krstarećih raketa ili od ruskog ratnog zrakoplovstva, pa bi Europa prestala postojati. Kineski odgovor bi pogodio Japan, Sjevernu Koreju i Australiju.

Nada Rusije i svih zdravih ljudi je da će vazali Washingtona shvatiti da su oni ti koji su u opasnosti, opasnosti od koje nemaju ništa dobiti a sve izgubiti, odbaciti svoje vazalstvo Washingtonu i ukloniti američke baze. Mora biti jasno europskim političarima da su bili uvučeni u sukob s Rusijom. Ovog tjedna zapovjednik NATO-a je rekao američkom Kongresu da treba financijska sredstva za veću vojnu prisutnost u Europi kako bi se suprotstavili „revitaliziranoj Rusiji.“

https://www.rt.com/news/387063-nato-counter-resurgent-russia/

Istražimo što znači „revitalizirana Rusija“. To znači Rusija koja je jaka i dovoljno uvjerena da brani svoje interese i one od njihovih saveznika. Drugim riječima, Rusija je bila sposobna blokirati Obaminu planiranu invaziju Sirije i bombardiranje Irana i da omogući da sirijske oružane snage poraze ISIS silu koju su poslali Obama i Hillary kako bi svrgnuli Assada.

Rusija „ponovno oživljava“, jer Rusija je sposobna blokirati američke jednostrane akcije protiv nekih drugih zemalja.

Ta sposobnost leti u lice neokonzervativne Wolfowitzove doktrine, koja kaže da je glavni cilj američke vanjske politike da spriječi uspon bilo koje zemlje koja može služiti kao obuzdavanje Washingtonovih jednostranih akcija.

Dok su neokonzervativci bili uvučeni u svoje „cakewalk“ ratove koji su trajali 16 godina, Rusija i Kina su se pojavili kao obuzdavanje unilateralizma koji je Washington uživao još od rušenja Sovjetskog Saveza. Ono što Washington pokušava učiniti jest vratiti svoju sposobnost djelovanja u svijetu bez ikakvog ograničenja bilo koje druge zemlje. On zahtijeva od Rusije i Kine da se povuku.

Hoće li se Rusija i Kina povući? To je moguće, ali ne bih se kladio životom planeta na to. Obje vlade imaju moralnu svijest koja je totalno izgubljena u Washingtonu. Niti je vlada zastrašena zapadnom propagandom. Ruski ministar vanjskih poslova Lavrov jučer je izjavio da slušamo beskrajne histerične optužbe protiv Rusije, ali optužbe su uvijek bez ikakvih dokaza.

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201705041053274379-lavrov-russia-us-relations/

Zamislivo je da Rusija i Kina mogu žrtvovati svoj suverenitet za život na Zemlji. Ali ta ista moralna svijest će ih tjerati da se suprotstave zlu koje je Washington kako ne bi i same podlegle zlu. Stoga mislim da zlo koje je vlada u Washingtonu vodi sjedinjene Američke Države i njihovu vazalnu državu do potpunog uništenja.

Budući da se rusko i kinesko vodstvo uvjerilo da Washington namjerava napasti nuklearnim oružjem njihove zemlje u iznenadnom napadu (vidi, na promjer, http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/04/us-forces-preparing-sudden-nuclear.html ), pitanje je kako će Rusija i Kina odgovoriti? Sjede li oni tamo i čekaju napad, ili će oni preduhitriti Washingtonski napad i same napasti?

Što bi vi napravili? Biste li sačuvali svoj život podvrgavanjem zlu, ili biste uništili zlo?

Istinito pisanje stavlja mije ime na liste (financirane od koga?) kao „ruska bena/agent“. Zapravo, ja sam agent svih ljudi koji ne odobravaju Washingtonovu spremnost da koristi rat kako bi uspostavio hegemoniju Washingtona u svijetu, ali shvatimo što to znači biti „ruski agent“

To znači poštivati međunarodno pravo, koje Washington ne poštuje. To znači poštivati život, koji Washington ne poštuje. To znači poštivati nacionalne interese drugih zemalja, što Washington ne čini. To znači odgovoriti na provokacije diplomatski i zahtijevati suradnju, što Washington ne radi. Ali Rusija radi. Jasno, „ruski agent“ je moralna osoba koja želi očuvati život i nacionalni identitet i dostojanstvo drugih naroda.

Je li Washington taj koji želi izbaciti ljudski moral i postati gospodar planeta. Kao što sam prethodno pisao, Washington bez ikakve sumnje je Sauron. Jedino važno pitanje je da li je ostalo dovoljno dobra u svijetu da se odupre i nadvlada Washingtonovo zlo.

Preveo: Fredi

Sauron Rules in Washington by Paul Craig Roberts

Sauron Rules in Washington

May 5, 2017 

CHINESE
CROATIAN
FRENCH
GREEK
POLISH

PORTUGUESE
ROMANIAN
RUSSIAN

SPANISH

Sauron Rules in Washington

Paul Craig Roberts

“The problem is that the world has listened to Americans for far too bloody long.”  — Dr. Julian Osborne, from the 2000 film version of Nevil Shute’s 1957 book, On the Beach 

A reader asked why neoconservatives push toward nuclear war when there can be no winners. If all die, what is the point?

The answer is that the neoconservatives believe that the US can win at minimum and perhaps zero damage.

Their insane plan is as follows: Washington will ring Russia and China with anti-ballistic missile bases in order to provide a shield against a retaliatory strike from Russia and China. Moreover, these US anti-ABM bases also can deploy nuclear attack missiles unknown to Russia and China, thus reducing the warning time to five minutes, leaving Washington’s victims little or no time in which to make a decision.

The neoconservatives think that Washington’s first strike will so badly damage the Russian and Chinese retaliatory capabilities that both governments will surrender rather than launch a response. The Russian and Chinese leaderships would conclude that their diminished forces leave little chance that many of their ICBMs will be able to get past Washington’s ABM shield, leaving the US largely intact. A feeble retaliation by Russia and China would simply invite a second wave US nuclear attack that would obliterate Russian and Chinese cities, killing millions and leaving both countries in ruins.

In short, the American warmongers are betting that the Russian and Chinese leaderships would submit rather than risk total destruction.

There is no question that neoconservatives are sufficiently evil to launch a preemptive nuclear attack, but possibly the plan aims to put Russia and China into a situation in which their leaders conclude that the deck is stacked against them and, therefore, they must accept Washington’s hegemony.

To feel secure in its hegemony, Washington would have to order Russia and China to disarm.

This plan is full of risks. Miscalculations are a feature of war. It is reckless and irresponsible to risk the life of the planet for nothing more than Washington’s hegemony.

The neoconservative plan puts Europe, the UK, Japan, S. Korea, and Australia at high risk were Russia and China to retaliate. Washington’s ABM shield cannot protect Europe from Russia’s nuclear cruise missiles or from the Russian Air Force, so Europe would cease to exist. China’s response would hit Japan, S. Korea, and Australia.

The Russian hope and that of all sane people is that Washington’s vassals will understand that it is they that are at risk, a risk from which they have nothing to gain and everything to lose, repudiate their vassalage to Washington and remove the US bases. It must be clear to European politicians that they are being dragged into conflict with Russia. This week the NATO commander told the US Congress that he needed funding for a larger military presence in Europe in order to counter “a resurgent Russia.” https://www.rt.com/news/387063-nato-counter-resurgent-russia/

Let us examine what is meant by “a resurgent Russia.” It means a Russia that is strong and confident enough to defend its interests and those of its allies. In other words, Russia was able to block Obama’s planned invasion of Syria and bombing of Iran and to enable the Syrian armed forces to defeat the ISIS force sent by Obama and Hillary to overthrow Assad.

Russia is “resurgent” because Russia is able to block US unilateral actions against some other countries.

This capability flies in the face of the neoconservative Wolfowitz doctrine, which says that the principal goal of US foreign policy is to prevent the rise of any country that can serve as a check on Washington’s unilateral action.

While the neocons were absorbed in their “cakewalk” wars that have now lasted 16 years, Russia and China emerged as checks on the unilateralism that Washington had enjoyed since the collapse of the Soviet Union. What Washington is trying to do is to recapture its ability to act worldwide without any constraint from any other country. This requires Russia and China to stand down.

Are Russia and China going to stand down? It is possible, but I would not bet the life of the planet on it. Both governments have a moral conscience that is totally missing in Washington. Neither government is intimidated by the Western propaganda. Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said yesterday that we hear endless hysterical charges against Russia, but the charges are always vacant of any evidence. https://sputniknews.com/politics/201705041053274379-lavrov-russia-us-relations/

Conceiveably, Russia and China could sacrifice their sovereignty for the sake of life on earth. But this same moral conscience will propel them to oppose the evil that is Washington in order not to succumb to evil themselves. Therefore, I think that the evil that rules in Washington is leading the United States and its vassal states to total destruction.

Having convinced the Russian and Chinese leaderships that Washington intends to nuke their countries in a surprise attack (see, for example, http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/04/us-forces-preparing-sudden-nuclear.html ), the question is how do Russia and China respond? Do they sit there and await an attack, or do they preempt Washington’s attack with an attack of their own?

What would you do? Would you preserve your life by submitting to evil, or would you destroy the evil?

Writing truthfully results in my name being put on lists (financed by who?) as a “Russian dupe/agent.” Actually, I am an agent of all people who disapprove of Washington’s willingness to use nuclear war in order to establish Washington’s hegemony over the world, but let us understand what it means to be a “Russian agent.”

It means to respect international law, which Washington does not. It means to respect life, which Washington does not. It means to respect the national interests of other countries, which Washington does not. It means to respond to provocations with diplomacy and requests for cooperation, which Washington does not. But Russia does. Clearly, a “Russian agent” is a moral person who wants to preserve life and the national identity and dignity of other peoples.

It is Washington that wants to snuff out human morality and become the master of the planet. As I have previously written, Washington without any question is Sauron. The only important question is whether there is sufficient good left in the world to resist and overcome Washington’s evil.

More from Articles & Columns ↓

CASTELLANO -- Lo que es realmente la “Crisis” de Corea del Norte

Lo que es realmente la “Crisis” de Corea del Norte

por Paul Craig Roberts, en Instituto para la Economía Política. Traducción de Leonardo Del Grosso

La “crisis” norcoreana es una orquestación de Washington. La última vez que Corea del Norte estuvo en guerra fue en 1950-53. Corea del Norte no ha atacado ni invadido a nadie en 64 años. Corea del Norte carece de la fuerza militar para atacar a cualquier país, como Corea del Sur y Japón, que está protegido por los Estados Unidos. Además, China no permitiría a Corea del Norte iniciar una guerra.

Entonces, ¿sobre qué es la demonización de Corea del Norte por la prensa prostituta y la administración Trump?

Es casi lo mismo que la demonización de Irán. La “amenaza iraní” fue una orquestación que se utilizó como cobertura para poner bases de misiles antibalísticos en las fronteras de Rusia. Un misil antibalístico (ABM) está destinado a interceptar y destruir ICBM (misiles balísticos intercontinentales) con ojivas nucleares y evitar que alcancen sus objetivos.

Washington afirmó que las bases anti-ABM no estaban dirigidas a Rusia, sino que eran para la protección de Europa contra los ICBM nucleares de Irán. Los estadounidenses indiferentes podrían haber creído esto, pero los rusos seguramente no lo hicieron porque Irán no tiene ni ICBM ni armas nucleares. El gobierno ruso ha dejado claro que Rusia entiende que las bases estadounidenses están dirigidas a impedir una retaliación rusa contra un primer ataque de Washington.

El gobierno chino tampoco es estúpido. El liderazgo chino entiende que la razón de la “crisis” norcoreana es proporcionar cobertura a Washington para que coloque misiles antibalísticos cerca de la frontera con China.

En otras palabras, Washington está creando un escudo contra la réplica nuclear de Rusia y China de un ataque nuclear de Estados Unidos contra ambos países.

China ha sido más contundente en su respuesta a los esfuerzos de Washington que los rusos. China ha exigido una detención inmediata del despliegue estadounidense de misiles en Corea del Sur.  Https://www.rt.com/news/386828-china-thaad-south-korea/

Con el fin de mantener a los estadounidenses confundidos, Washington ahora llama THAAD, Terminal de Defensa Aérea de Gran Altitud, a los anti-ABMs. China entiende que THAAD no tiene nada que ver con Corea del Norte, que limita con Corea del Sur, lo que hace inútil que Corea del Norte ataque a Corea del Sur con ICBM.

THAAD en Corea del Sur está dirigido directamente contra las fuerzas de represalia de China. Es parte de los preparativos de Washington para hacer un bombardeo nuclear a Rusia y China con una consecuencia mínima a los EE.UU., aunque Europa sin duda será completamente destruida en tanto que THAAD o anti-ABMs son inútiles contra los misiles de crucero nucleares rusos y la fuerza aérea rusa.

Pero ningún Imperio se ha preocupado por el destino de sus vasallos, y Washington no está interesado en el destino de Europa. Washington sólo está interesado en su hegemonía sobre el mundo.

La pregunta es: ahora que Rusia y China entienden que Washington está preparándose para un ataque nuclear preventivo contra ellos para eliminar los dos obstáculos al comportamiento unilateral de Washington, ¿los dos países se quedarán sentados y esperarán el ataque?

¿Qué harías tú?

El 27 de abril publiqué una columna, “Washington planea ataques nucleares contra Rusia y China”. Mi columna era un informe sobre que esta era la conclusión de los mismos rusos y chinos. He citado al teniente general ruso Viktor Poznikhir, Jefe Adjunto de Operaciones del Estado Mayor Ruso, y he proporcionado enlaces de la expresión de su preocupación, tales como: https://www.rt.com/news/386276-us-missile-shield-russia-strike/

Como los lectores de mi sitio web son un grupo auto-seleccionado de personas inteligentes y preocupadas que quieren saber lo que es la realidad en contraposición a lo que es The Matrix, me sorprendió un poco cuando varios me escribieron que estaban en desacuerdo conmigo sobre que Washington planea un ataque nuclear contra Rusia y China. ¡Escribo con claridad; sin embargo aquí había varios lectores que confundieron mi informe de la conclusión del general ruso con mi opinión personal! También me sorprendió que los lectores pensaron que importaba lo que piensan ellos o lo que pienso. Todo lo que importa es lo que piensan los líderes rusos y chinos.

Luego miré las secciones de comentarios de otros sitios que postean mis columnas, y estaban los trolls contratados por la CIA, el Mossad, la Fundación Nacional para la Democracia, George Soros, la OTAN, el Departamento de Estado y otros, denunciándome por promover la guerra nuclear. Por supuesto, es Washington el que está promoviendo la guerra nuclear, y Washington ha convencido a Rusia y China de que un ataque nuclear preventivo está en su futuro.

Washington, estando lleno de arrogancia, piensa que esto asustará a Rusia y China y que los dos gobiernos se someterán a Washington.

Posiblemente lo harán, pero no apostaría la vida del planeta a ello.

Es concebible que la educación en los EE.UU. y en todo el mundo occidental es tan pobre que los lectores educados en las últimas décadas simplemente no pueden comprender lo que están leyendo. ¿Cómo explicar de otra manera las malas interpretaciones de mi informe sobre la conclusión del Estado Mayor de Rusia? La única otra explicación es que los sitios web que tienen secciones de comentarios proporcionan la oportunidad para que las élites gobernantes contraten difamación a los traficantes de verdades.

Raramente veo un comentario inteligente en sitios web que tienen secciones de comentarios. La mayoría de los comentarios provienen de personas demasiado avergonzadas de hablar en sus nombres reales y que no están dispuestas a proporcionar sus direcciones de correo electrónico real. Casi todos los comentarios vienen de de trolls pagados y de bobos ignorantes narcicistas escondidos detrás de nombres falsos y falsas direcciones de correo electrónico.

No escribo para ser calumniado por trolls pagados e ignorantes idiotas narcisistas. Considero que es altamente irresponsable que los sitios web socaven a sus escritores con acusaciones anónimas y calumnias de nadie sabe quién. No debe haber ninguna sección de comentario a menos que haya un chequeo firme en el nombre verdadero del comentarista y la dirección de correo electrónico real.

Los sitios que no tienen este requisito ya no tienen mi permiso para volver a publicar mis columnas.

Washington, como lo comprenden los gobiernos ruso y chino, ha puesto la vida en la tierra bajo una amenaza grave. Esto es asunto serio. No hay espacio para que idiotas narcisistas ignorantes y trolls pagados utilicen Internet para atacar a los pocos que sinceramente hablan de la grave amenaza que toda la vida enfrenta debido al impulso de Washington por la hegemonía mundial.

Traducción: Leonardo Del Grosso

Fuentes: 
http://leonardodelgrosso.blogspot.com.ar/2017/05/la-fortaleza-de-kim-jong-un-una.html
http://sakerlatam.es/estados-unidos/lo-que-es-realmente-la-crisis-de-corea-del-norte/

What the N. Korean “Crisis” Is Really About Paul Craig Roberts

What the N. Korean “Crisis” Is Really About

May 3, 2017 

What the N. Korean “Crisis” Is Really About

Paul Craig Roberts

The North Korean “crisis” is a Washington orchestration. North Korea was last at war 1950-53. N. Korea has not attacked or invaded anyone in 64 years. N. Korea lacks the military strength to attack any country, such as South Korea and Japan, that is protected by the US. Moreover, China would not permit N. Korea to start a war.

So what is the demonization of N. Korea by the presstitutes and Trump administration about?

It is about the same thing that the demonization of Iran was about. The “Iranian threat” was an orchestration that was used as cover to put US anti-ballistic missile bases on Russia’s borders. An anti-ballistic missile (ABM) is intended to intercept and destroy nuclear-armed ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles) and prevent them from reaching their targets.

Washington claimed that the anti-ABM bases were not directed at Russia, but were for the protection of Europe against Iran’s nuclear ICBMs. Insouciant Americans might have believed this, but the Russians surely did not as Iran has neither ICBMs nor nuclear weapons. The Russian government has made it clear that Russia understands the US bases are directed at preventing a Russian retalliation against a Washington first strike.

The Chinese government also is not stupid. The Chinese leadership understands that the reason for the N. Korean “crisis” is to provide cover for Washington to put anti-ballistic missile sites near China’s border.

In other words, Washington is creating a shield against nuclear retalliation from both Russia and China from a US nuclear strike against both countries.

China has been more forceful in its reply to Washington’s efforts than have the Russians. China has demanded an immediate halt to the US deployment of missiles in South Korea. https://www.rt.com/news/386828-china-thaad-south-korea/

In order to keep Americans confused, Washington now calls anti-ABMs THAAD, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense. China understands that THAAD has nothing whatsoever to do with N. Korea, which borders S. Korea, making it pointless for N. Korea to attack S. Korea with ICBMs.

THAAD in S. Korea is directed against China’s retaliatory forces. It is part of Washington’s preparations to nuke both Russia and China with minimal consequence to the US, although Europe would certainly be completely destroyed as THAAD or anti-ABMs are useless against Russian nuclear cruise missiles and the Russian air force.

But no Empire has ever cared about the fate of its vassals, and Washington is uninterested in Europe’s fate. Washington is interested only in its hegemony over the world.

The question is: now that Russia and China understand that Washington is preparing for a preemptive nuclear strike against them in order to remove the two constraints on Washington’s unilateral behavior, will the two countries sit there and wait for the strike?

What would you do?

On April 27 I posted on this website a column, “Washington Plans to Nuke Russia and China.” My column was a report that this was the conclusion of the Russians and Chinese themselves. I quoted Russian Lt. Gen. Viktor Poznikhir, Deputy Head of Operations of the Russian General Staff and provided links for his expression of concern such as: https://www.rt.com/news/386276-us-missile-shield-russia-strike/

As the readers of my website are a self-selected group of intelligent and concerned people who want to know what is the reality as opposed to what is The Matrix, I was somewhat taken aback when several wrote to me that they disagreed with me that Washington planned to nuke Russia and China. I write clearly; yet here were several readers who mistook my report on the conclusion of the Russian general staff for my opinion! I was also amazed that the readers thought that it mattered what they think or what I think. All that matters is what the Russian and Chinese leadership think.

I then looked at the comment sections on other sites that repost my columns, and there were the trolls hired by the CIA, Mossad, National Endowment for Democracy, George Soros, NATO, US State Department, and others denouncing me for promoting nuclear war. Of course, it is Washington that is promoting nuclear war, and it is Washington that has convinced Russia and China that a preemptive nuclear strike is in their future.

Washington, being full of hubris, thinks that this will scare Russia and China and that the two governments will submit to Washington.

Possibly they will, but I would not bet the life of the planet on it.

It is conceivable that education in the US and throughout the Western world is so poorly done that readers educated in recent decades simply cannot comprehend what they are reading. How else to explain the mischaracterizations of my report on the conclusion of the Russian General Staff? The only other explanation is that websites that have comment sections provide the opportunity for the ruling elites to hire the slander of truth-tellers.

I seldom see an intelligent comment on websites that have comment sections. Most comments come from people too ashamed to speak in their real names and who are unwilling to provide their real email addresses. Almost all comments come from narcissistic ignorant fools hiding behind fake names and fake email addresses and from paid trolls.

I don’t write in order to be slandered by paid trolls and ignorant narcissistic fools. I regard it as highly irresponsible for websites to undercut their writers with anonymous accusations and slander from no one knows who. There should be no comment sections unless there is a firm check on the commentator’s real name and real email address.

Sites that do not have this requirement no longer have my permission to repost my columns.

Washington, as the Russian and Chinese governments comprehend, has placed life on earth under dire threat. This is serious business. There is no space for ignorant narcissistic idiots and paid trolls to be using the Internet to attack the few who truthfully report the dire threat that all life faces from Washington’s drive for world hegemony.

More from Articles & Columns ↓

American Democracy: A Dead Man Walking Paul Craig Roberts

American Democracy: A Dead Man Walking

May 2, 2017

American Democracy: A Dead Man Walking

Paul Craig Roberts

Trump’s “sell-out,” as it is called, coming on top of Obama’s eight-year “sell-out,” is instructive. We have now had a Democratic president who sold out the people who elected him and a Republican president who has done the same thing. This is a very interesting point, the meaning of which most people miss.

But not Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin. At the Valdai discussion club, Putin summed up Western democracy:

In the West, voters cannot change policies through elections, because the ruling elites control whoever is elected. Elections give the appearance of democracy, but voting does not change the policies that favor war and the elites. Therefore, the will of the people is impotent.

People are experiencing that they and their votes have no influence on the conduct of affairs of the country. This makes them afraid, frusrated, and angry, a combination of emotions that is dangerous to the ruling elite, who in response organize the powers of the state against the people, while urging them with propaganda to support more wars.

Obama promised to get out of Afghanistan or Iraq or perhaps it was both. He promised to reverse the police state created by the George W. Bush regime. He promised to focus American resources on American domestic problems, such as health care.

But what did he do? He expanded the wars and launched new ones, destroyed Libya and attempted to destroy Syria, but was stopped by British non-participation and Russian objection. Obama overthrew democratic governments in Honduras and Ukraine. He expanded the police state. He began the demonization of Russia and Putin. He betrayed the American people again by allowing the private insurance industry to write his health care plan known as Obamacare. The private interests wrote a plan that diverts public monies from health care to their profits.

All of this is forgotten when the ruling elites and the presstitutes that serve only them refocused the demonization on Trump. Suddenly, it was the president-elect of the United States who was the main danger to the US and the American people. Trump was a Russian agent. He had conspired with Putin to steal the US election from Hillary Clinton and make the White House a partner of Putin’s alleged reconsruction of the Soviet Empire.

The nonsense was hot and furious, and it was effective. Trump succumbed to pressure and sacrificed his National Secuity Advisior, who was supportive of Trump’s promise to normalize relations with Russia. Trump replaced him with a Russophobic idiot who apparantly cannot wait to see mushroom clouds over cities all over the Western world.

Why did two presidents in succession completely sell out the people who voted for them?

The answer is that presidents are not as powerful as the interest groups who make the decisions.

Trump was going to get us out of Syria, so he committed an unambigious war crime by gratuitously attacking Syria with Tomahawk missiles.

Trump was going to normalize relations with Russia, so his Secretary of State announces that US economic sanctions will stay on Russia until Russia hands over to Ukraine the Russian Crimean naval base on the Black Sea.

It is impossible to normalize relations when the cost to the other party of the normalization is national suicide.

Despite Trump’s complete surrender to the powers that be, today (May 2) on NPR I heard raw propaganda dressed up as “expert opinion” that Trump is biased against the media, when what all of us have seen is massive media bias against Trump, including the program to which I was listening.

For example, NPR had accumulated “experts” who said that Trump had slandered Obama by accusing him of intercepting his comunications. NPR said nothing about the Obama regime’s charge that Trump conspired with Putin to steal the election from Hillary Clinton.

If anything was slander, this was, but all the talk was about how Obama could sue Trump.

But, of course, both are public figures, and neither can sue the other.

I wonder why NPR’s “expert” didn’t get around to this point.

Why is the ruling oligarchy still using its presstitutes to campaign against a president who has surrendered to them?

Perhaps the answer is that the real powers that be are going to make an example out of Trump so that never again does a person running for elected office make a populist appeal to the electorate.

More from Articles & Columns ↓

Lavrov Dismantles UK-Led Sarin ‘Investigation’ in 30 Seconds

 Lavrov Dismantles UK-Led Sarin ‘Investigation’ in 30 Seconds

May 1, 2017 

Lavrov Dismantles UK-Led Sarin ‘Investigation’ in 30 Seconds

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/lavrov-dismantles-uk-led-sarin-investigation-30-seconds/ri19679?utm_campaign=related-articles&utm_source=/en/politics/lavrov-dismantles-uk-led-sarin-investigation-30-seconds/ri19679

Lavrov Dismantles UK-Led Sarin 'Investigation' in 30 Seconds

Tue, Apr 25, 2017 | 8832 54

Lavrov is not amused

Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has a simple message for the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons: Stop with the bullshit. 

Speaking with journalists in Moscow on Monday, Lavrov pointed out that the OPCW has taken more than four months to 'analyze' chemical samples from Aleppo, which would likely implicate Syrian 'opposition' forces in war crimes. And surprise, surprise — the OPCW needs even moretime before it can release a report. 

Meanwhile, it took this prestigious organization only four days to declare that Sarin was used in the April 4 attack in Khan Sheikhun. 

Lavrov is not amused:

Four months ago, together with our Syrian colleagues, we sent samples that we got from Aleppo, after it was liberated. We believe these samples are evidence of the fact that opposition armed groups used chemical weapons.

Four months later — no results. And they say they need more time.

But this other unit, that processes complaints about the Syrian regime, as we were told, released a statement several days after the Idlib incident. And that statement confirms the initial allegations, allegations by NGOs and the White Helmets, that it was Sarin. So in one case we have 4 months — nothing happens, no information is released. But in the other case the other unit issues that statement in just 4 days. But there’s no data — what laboratory was used, what were the samples like, where were they taken?

How can this be? Lavrov knows:

The mission should provide for geographical diversity. As I said, this mechanism is comprised of two units, one receives applications and complains from the Syrian government, and the other processes complaints about the Syrian government.

And both of the units are chaired by UK citizens.

Lavrov then delivers the final blow:

Jokes aside, it’s an attempt to create a distorted perspective, and then to use this distorted reality to in an attempt to avoid an inclusive dialogue and switch to regime change operations. Another regime change operation in this region. 

Okay, we lied. It probably took Lavrov 45 seconds to completely demolish this fraudulent organization and its benevolent 'investigations'.