theduran--2020-01-29--How U.S. and its Allies Enforce Their Lies for Wars and Dictatorships

How many Americans know that even in Hindu India , Iran ’ s General Qasem Soleimani ( whom Trump has assassinated ) was recognized as having been perhaps the world ’ s leader of the fight against both ISIS and the Taliban — two fundamentalist-Sunni ( that is , pro-jihadist ) groups that especially threaten India .
Why don ’ t Americans know this crucial fact ?
In whose benefit is it that they don ’ t know it ?
It is in the interests of the few people who actually control the U.S. regime and its press , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Without enforced suppression of truth , there would be no way that the U.S. and its allied regimes could continue hiding the lies that were behind their evil invasions of Iraq in 2003 , and of Syria since 2012 ( trying to deliver Syria to the Saud family ) , and their bloody coup against Ukraine in 2014 , and also their take-overs and attempted take-overs of other countries ( such as Bolivia and Venezuela ) that had refused to be bullied by the U.S. regime into complying with its obsessive anti-Russian demands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the U.S. regime ’ s secret continuation of the Cold War , even after Russia had quit the Cold War in 1991 .
( The Cold War itself had started inside U.S. President Harry S. Truman ’ s head , as an immediate result of a deceptive statement that had been made to him by his top general , Dwight David Eisenhower , on 26 July 1945 . )
And , so , all of these lies are still being pumped by the U.S. regime ( which itself effectively took over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ July 1945 ) , and remain fully enforced by suppression of the truth about each one of these ( and many other ) matters .
It ’ s being done in all news-media except a few of the non-mainstream ones .
This is a widespread white-out of history , and replacing that history by myths , in order to deceive their own masses into misinterpreting ( so that the domestic public will support ) U.S. foreign policies , which are in the regimes ’ interests but not in the interests of the American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For example , as soon as Bolivia ’ s President Evo Morales , on 10 November 2019 , offered Bolivia ’ s U.S.-trained generals to hold another election there and to again have the Bolivian people assert their will , the U.S.-trained generals refused his offer and ordered him to immediately resign ; and , the very next day , Donald Trump said “ The United States applauds the Bolivian people for demanding freedom and the Bolivian military for abiding by its oath to protect not just a single person , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 29 Alexa-ranked in U.S. New York Times editorialized on November 11th that “ when a leader resorts to brazenly abusing the power and institutions put in his care by the electorate , as President Evo Morales did in Bolivia , it is he who sheds his legitimacy , and forcing him out often becomes the only remaining option .
That is what the Bolivians have done.
” Then , the # 81,090 Alexa-ranked in U.S. Antiwar.com headlined “ Finally Got Him : The Bolivian Coup ” , and their Ted Snider reported the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s mainstream ‘ news ’ -media about this , including : If it wasn ’ t a coup , why was Morales forced from office by the military ?
Why was he driven out of office in Bolivia and into asylum in Mexico for the sake of his safety , while a coup leader announced that the police and military were hunting Morales down and putting Bolivia into lockdown ?
Why , as he fled and sought asylum , was his house ransacked , his sister ’ s house set on fire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ministers kidnapped and held hostage until the ministers resigned ?
Though reported in the mainstream media as abandoning Morales , Victor Borda resigned as president of the Bolivian congress and resigned his position as MP because his brother was kidnapped to force him to do so .
If it wasn ’ t a coup , why did the opposition assume power before the legislature voted on approving Morales ’ resignation as the constitution demands ?
Why did Jeanine Añez declare herself interim president in the absence of the quorum that is legally required @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the military high command for over an hour ?
… The often repeated claim that Morales went against the constitution is also a manipulation of the truth .
The claim is based on a 2016 Bolivian referendum that decided in favor of term limits .
That referendum , which passed by a count of 51 % -49 % , would have prevented Morales from running in the current election .
But what the charge omits is that a year later , Bolivia ’ s highest court – whose decisions stand as the law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ term limits that the referendum had so narrowly favored .
So , Morales did not attempt , as Trump claimed , “ to override the Bolivian constitution.
” And the third strike against Trump ’ s claim is that Morales did not override the will of the people .
The people overwhelmingly re-elected him .
Morales won 47.1 % of the vote , while the next closest candidate , Carlos Mesa , managed to attract only 36.5 % of the voters .
The Bolivian constitution allows a president to be elected in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or she wins at least 40 % of the vote and defeats the person who came in second place by at least 10 % .
So , Morales clearly got reelected to the presidency in the first round .
… The second reason [ why the coup was done ] was economically motivated .
If Venezuela has oil , Bolivia has lithium : lots of lithium .
In fact , Bolivia may have 70 % of the world ’ s lithium reserves .
And lithium is the new oil .
As oil is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lithium is essential for electric cars .
Morales , like Hugo Chavez in Venezuela , is a nationalist who sought a new relationship between his land ’ s people and his land ’ s resources : he didn ’ t want all the wealth from Bolivia ’ s natural resources slipping through the fingers of the Bolivian people and into the hands of the huge international corporations .
And as that approach to oil put Chavez in the sights of the American coup planners , so Morales ’ approach to lithium put him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to allow foreign companies into Bolivia , but he stipulated that any lithium mining had to be carried out in equal partnership with Bolivia ’ s national mining company and Bolivia ’ s national lithium company .
That made Morales a problem to the big transnational mining companies .
A problem that had to go .
In 2018 , Germany ’ s ACI Systems had come to an agreement with Bolivia .
Listening to the protest of the people of the region , Morales canceled that deal on November 4 , 2019 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ gone .
The third reason was politically motivated .
After Chavez pushed the Latin American political pendulum to the left , a series of coups , elections and American meddling have pushed that pendulum back to the right .
But the pendulum has a domestic mind of its own , and it has begun swinging back to the left , including in large , important countries like Mexico and Argentina .
The Bolivian election may have offered America an opportunity to put its hand back on the pendulum .
The leaked coup conversations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bob Menéndez and Ted Cruz as being committed to aiding the coup .
Marco Rubio ’ s tweets , before the vote count was even finished , set the stage early for the coup .
And that may not be the only supporting role America played .
It was the Bolivian military that provided the push that triggered the coup .
The chief commander of the Bolivian armed forces , Williams Kaliman , put the final and decisive pressure on Morales to resign .
On November 10 , Kaliman announced that the military @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the State renounce his presidential mandate.
” But Kaliman has deep ties to the US military .
Though not mentioned in the mainstream media , it was reported early on in the Latin American media that Kaliman had served for several years as Bolivia ’ s military attaché to Washington .
… If America ’ s 607 billionaires had funded ( via their corporations ’ ads etc . )
sites such as antiwar dot com as much as they fund sites such as nytimes dot com , then maybe the truth would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that inundate Americans are , but the billionaires stand behind coups and rigged ‘ elections ’ , not behind democracy anywhere ; so , they don ’ t do any such thing .
Consequently , this is actually about a Western version of samizdat — it ’ s the West ’ s equivalent to the former Soviet Union ’ s systematic , and equally pervasive , truth-suppression , to fool the public into thinking that the Government represents them , no matter how much it does not .
( The chief trick in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thinking that since there is more than one political party , one of them will be “ good , ” even though the fact may actually be that each of the parties represents simply a different faction of a psychopathically cravenous aristocracy — in this case , America ’ s billionaires , who control the country ’ s international corporations .
After all : each American party lied and supported invading Iraq in 2003 , Libya in 2011 , and Syria constantly ; and no American party acknowledges that the 2014 regime-change in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having been a domestic Ukrainian democratic revolution , such as they all allege .
Part of the Obama Administration ’ s plan for its takeover of Ukraine was to steal Russia ’ s Crimean naval base and to transform it into a U.S. naval base .
But that portion of Obama ’ s coup-plan wasn ’ t able to be successfully executed ( because Putin blocked his takeover of Crimea ) .
On such important matters , all of those media lie , and in basically the same ways .
These lies are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regime ’ s other political lies are heavily partisan — telling different things to Democrats than to Republicans .
Merely having multiple political parties doesn ’ t necessarily mean that the country isn ’ t a dictatorship .
The multi-party trick is crucial to America ’ s fascism ; and , in fact , America ’ s Founders , who wrote the Constitution , were hoping to establish a one-party democratic government ; but no mainstream U.S. medium draws attention to that uncomfortable-for-today ’ s-billionaires historical fact .
Unprofitable truths get hidden , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Julian Assange is rotting to death inside Britain ’ s equivalent to the U.S. regime ’ s Guanatanamo Bay prison , which is Belmarsh Prison , in London .
As the CIA-edited and written Wikipedia ’ s article on Belmarsh Prison retrospectively admits , “ Between 2001 and 2002 , Belmarsh Prison was used to detain a number of people indefinitely without charge or trial under the provisions of the Part 4 of the Anti-terrorism , Crime and Security Act 2001 , leading it to be called the ‘ British version of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only because of the case of Julian Assange is it now publicly known that this characterization of that prison is — at least for him — equally true today ; he is being tortured there .
And Assange is , indeed , being held in that hell-hole “ indefinitely without charge or trial , ” even after his having previously been held in various other forms of confinement , ever since at least 12 April 2012 , when — being then ‘ temporarily ’ under house-arrest in Norfolk England , while awaiting trial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was reluctantly abandoned by the Government only when the alleged victim refused to testify against him — Assange broadcast an interview for RT , Russian Television , an interview of the head of Lebanon ’ s Hezbollah , Hassan Nasrallah .
The U.S.-and-allied regimes ’ billionaires-owned-and-controlled ‘ news ’ -media condemned Assange for this interview , because it enabled whomever still had an open mind , amongst the Western public , to hear from one of those billionares ’ destruction-targets ( Nasrallah ) , and they criticized Assange for doing this on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that America ’ s billionaires are especially trying to conquer , which is ( and since 26 July 1945 has consistently been ) Russia .
( Of course , regime-fronts such as PBS , CNN and BBC , wouldn ’ t have telecast any interview of Nasrallah , but U.S.-and-allied billionaires want no news-operation to do so . )
The great then-independent investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald headlined about that interview , at Salon on 18 April 2012 , “ Attacks on RT and Assange reveal much about the critics : Those who pretend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hate those who actually do it.
” How true that was , and unfortunately still is , in this dictatorship !
And Assange himself is the best example of the regime ’ s hypocrisies .
Greenwald wrote : Let ’ s examine the unstated premises at work here .
There is apparently a rule that says it ’ s perfectly OK for a journalist to work for a media outlet owned and controlled by a weapons manufacturer ( GE/NBC/MSNBC ) , or by the U.S. and British governments ( BBC/Stars & Stripes/Voice of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Saudi Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal ( Wall St. Journal/Fox News ) , or by a banking corporation with long-standing ties to right-wing governments ( Politico ) , or by for-profit corporations whose profits depend upon staying in the good graces of the U.S. government ( Kaplan/The Washington Post ) , or by loyalists to one of the two major political parties ( National Review/TPM/countless others ) , but it ’ s an intrinsic violation of journalistic integrity to work for a media outlet owned by the Russian government .
Where did that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ temporary ’ house-arrest there , Assange was allowed asylum by Ecuador ’ s progressive President Rafael Correa on 20 June 2012 , to stay in London ’ s Ecuadoran Embassy , so as not to be seized by the UK regime to be sent to prison and probable death-without-trial in the U.S. To Correa ’ s shock , it turned out that Correa ’ s successor , Vice President Lenin Moreno , behaved actually as a U.S. agent , promptly forcing Assange out of the Embassy , into Belmarsh prison , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ die in a U.S. prison , also without trial .
So : for what is Assange being imprisoned , and perhaps murdered ?
He divulged government secrets that should never even have been secrets !
His ‘ crime ’ was to reveal truths .
He raised the blanket of lies , which covers over these actually dictatorial clandestine international actions .
He exposed these evil imperialistic operations , which are hidden behind ( and under ) the blanket of imperialists ’ lies .
For this , he is being martyred — he martyrs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no actual democracy ( but only those lies ) .
Here is an example of the lies for which his Wikileaks places itself on the block even now : On December 29th , I headlined “ Further Proof : U.S. , UK , & France Committed War-Crime on 14 April 2018 ” and reported highlights of the latest Wikileaks document-dumps regarding a U.S.-UK-French operation to cover-up ( via their control over the OPCW ) these three regimes having committed an international war-crime when they had fired 105 missiles against Syria on 14 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to punish Syria for having perpetrated a gas-attack in Douma seven days before — except that there hadn ’ t been any such gas-attack , but the OPCW simply lied and said that there might have been one , and that the Syrian Government might have done it , even though the management had been informed by their own technical staff that all of this was false !
That ’ s playing the public for suckers , and it ’ s what the OPCW now does .
Back on 3 November 2019 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Bipartisan majorities want some U.S. troops to stay in Syria ” and reported that when citing ISIS as America ’ s enemy that must be defeated , 69 % of U.S. respondents wanted U.S. troops to stay in Syria .
But when did ISIS ever constitute a threat to U.S. national security ?
And under what international law is any U.S. soldier , who is inside Syria , anything other than an invader there ?
The answer , to both of these questions , is obviously “ never ” and “ none.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ foreigners out and declared them to be alien invaders .
( Russian troops , by contrast , were invited in and actually started the operation against ISIS in Syria , which embarrassed the U.S. then to join in on that , even while the U.S. assisted ISIS forces in Iraq to escape into Syria ( so as to help overthrow its secular Government ) — supreme hypocrisy . )
But if you are an investor in Lockheed Martin , don ’ t you want the American people to be suckers about both ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ People such as Julian Assange don ’ t want the public anywhere to be lied-to .
Anyone who is in the propaganda-business — serving companies such as Lockheed Martin — wants the public to be suckers .
( How else will U.S. taxpayers willingly support their constantly funding the world ’ s most corrupt military ? )
Whereas Russian media openly state that Qasem Soleimani was the world ’ s most effective general against ISIS , no U.S. media do , but some of them provide buried in a report facts which support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here and here , and some news-media of other nations ( even of India ) also are more public about the fact .
( Even in anti-Muslim India , General Suleimani is recognized as having been a global leader in the battles against both ISIS and the Taliban — both of which fundamentalist-Sunni groups threaten India . )
So , on January 3rd , Trump assassinated the world ’ s most effective general who led the elimination of ISIS .
And the U.S. Government calls Soleimani a ‘ terrorist ’ , because America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back .
Sometimes , however , political partisanship in America does make public , to the supporters of one Party , the lies that are being told by a representative of another Party , such as happened , for example , on January 4th when the Democratic Party propaganda-organ Huffington Post headlined “ Mike Pence Slammed After Falsely Linking Qassem Soleimani To 9/11 : Neither Iran nor Soleimani were linked to the terror attack in the 9/11 Commission report .
Pence didn ’ t even get the number of hijackers right.
” However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public aren ’ t being informed that the problem is all of America ’ s billionaires — of both Parties — and not merely the billionaires who finance the careers of the public officials in ‘ the opposite ’ Party .
This is the way the free market actually works .
It works by lying , and in such a country the Government serves the people who have the money , and not the people who don ’ t .
The people who don ’ t have the money are instead supposed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whatever the billionaires ’ firms sell ) .
And , so , they are .
But this is not democracy .
Democracy , in fact , is impossible if the public are predominantly deceived .
If the public are predominantly deceived , then the people who do the deceiving will be the dictators there .
And , if a country has dictators , then it ’ s no democracy .
In a totally free market , only the people with the most money will have any freedom at all ; most of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who are fooled by the professionals at doing that — lying .
Who , ultimately , will be paying by far the vast majority of those professionals ?
Of course , the owners of the U.S.-based international corporations will be .
The super-rich enforce their smears , and their other lies , by hiring professionals to do this .
When Barack Obama said that “ The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation ” — so that each other nation is “ dispensable ” — he was merely exemplifying the view @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and that therefore everyone else is dispensable .
Of course , this is the way that he , and Donald Trump , both have governed in the U.S. And Americans overwhelmingly endorse this viewpoint .
They ’ re fooled by both parties , because both parties serve only their respective billionaires — and because billionaires are above the law ; they are the law , in America and its allied regimes .
That ’ s the way it is .
This is the American gospel , and it ’ s called “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of capitalism , not only democratic , but even facsist — i.e.
, dictatorial capitalism .
Oddly , after Russia switched to capitalism in 1991 , the American gospel switched instead to pure global conquest — über-imperialism ( now called in America “ neoconservatism , ” but it ’ s just ordinary fascist imperialism , indistinguishable from the Axis powers of WW II ) — and the American public didn ’ t even blink .
So : nowadays , capitalism has come to mean über-imperialism .
That ’ s today ’ s American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ type of capitalism — a very ugly type .
This is fascism .
Adolf Hitler would be smiling , upon today ’ s Amerika .
And , as far as whistleblowers — such as Julian Assange , and Edward Snowden , and Chelsea Manning , and other champions of honesty and of democracy — are concerned : Americans agree with the billionaires , who detest and destroy such whistleblowers .
Champions of democracy are shunned here , where PR reigns , and real journalism is almost non-existent ( except at a few of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this , but most even most of the small online sites parrot one or the other of the U.S. political Party ’ s viewpoints , against all the other Parties , in order to pretend to be ‘ anti-Establishment ’ — which isn ’ t the same thing as being truly independent ) .
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author , most recently , of They ’ re Not Even Close : The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records , 1910-2010 , and of CHRIST ’ S VENTRILOQUISTS : The Event that Created @ @

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org
How many Americans know that even in Hindu India, Iran’s General Qasem Soleimani (whom Trump has assassinated) was recognized as having been perhaps the world’s leader of the fight against both ISIS and the Taliban — two fundamentalist-Sunni (that is, pro-jihadist) groups that especially threaten India. Why don’t Americans know this crucial fact? In whose benefit is it that they don’t know it? It is in the interests of the few people who actually control the U.S. regime and its press, and these people will be identified here.
Without enforced suppression of truth, there would be no way that the U.S. and its allied regimes could continue hiding the lies that were behind their evil invasions of Iraq in 2003, and of Syria since 2012 (trying to deliver Syria to the Saud family), and their bloody coup against Ukraine in 2014, and also their take-overs and attempted take-overs of other countries (such as Bolivia and Venezuela) that had refused to be bullied by the U.S. regime into complying with its obsessive anti-Russian demands. All of these operations are part of the U.S. regime’s secret continuation of the Cold War, even after Russia had quit the Cold War in 1991. (The Cold War itself had started inside U.S. President Harry S. Truman’s head, as an immediate result of a deceptive statement that had been made to him by his top general, Dwight David Eisenhower, on 26 July 1945.)
And, so, all of these lies are still being pumped by the U.S. regime (which itself effectively took over the U.S. Government on that date, 26 July 1945), and remain fully enforced by suppression of the truth about each one of these (and many other) matters. It’s being done in all news-media except a few of the non-mainstream ones. This is a widespread white-out of history, and replacing that history by myths, in order to deceive their own masses into misinterpreting (so that the domestic public will support) U.S. foreign policies, which are in the regimes’ interests but not in the interests of the American people (nor of any other).
For example, as soon as Bolivia’s President Evo Morales, on 10 November 2019, offered Bolivia’s U.S.-trained generals to hold another election there and to again have the Bolivian people assert their will, the U.S.-trained generals refused his offer and ordered him to immediately resign; and, the very next day, Donald Trump said “The United States applauds the Bolivian people for demanding freedom and the Bolivian military for abiding by its oath to protect not just a single person, but Bolivia’s constitution.” The #29 Alexa-ranked in U.S. New York Times editorialized on November 11th that “when a leader resorts to brazenly abusing the power and institutions put in his care by the electorate, as President Evo Morales did in Bolivia, it is he who sheds his legitimacy, and forcing him out often becomes the only remaining option. That is what the Bolivians have done.” Then, the #81,090 Alexa-ranked in U.S. Antiwar.com headlined “Finally Got Him: The Bolivian Coup”, and their Ted Snider reported the truth that’s excluded from America’s mainstream ‘news’-media about this, including:
If it wasn’t a coup, why was Morales forced from office by the military? Why was he driven out of office in Bolivia and into asylum in Mexico for the sake of his safety, while a coup leader announced that the police and military were hunting Morales down and putting Bolivia into lockdown? Why, as he fled and sought asylum, was his house ransacked, his sister’s house set on fire, and the families of his cabinet ministers kidnapped and held hostage until the ministers resigned? Though reported in the mainstream media as abandoning Morales, Victor Borda resigned as president of the Bolivian congress and resigned his position as MP because his brother was kidnapped to force him to do so.
If it wasn’t a coup, why did the opposition assume power before the legislature voted on approving Morales’ resignation as the constitution demands? Why did Jeanine Añez declare herself interim president in the absence of the quorum that is legally required to make that decision after meeting with the military high command for over an hour? …
The often repeated claim that Morales went against the constitution is also a manipulation of the truth. The claim is based on a 2016 Bolivian referendum that decided in favor of term limits. That referendum, which passed by a count of 51%-49%, would have prevented Morales from running in the current election. But what the charge omits is that a year later, Bolivia’s highest court – whose decisions stand as the law of the land – ruled against the term limits that the referendum had so narrowly favored. So, Morales did not attempt, as Trump claimed, “to override the Bolivian constitution.”
And the third strike against Trump’s claim is that Morales did not override the will of the people. The people overwhelmingly re-elected him. Morales won 47.1% of the vote, while the next closest candidate, Carlos Mesa, managed to attract only 36.5% of the voters. The Bolivian constitution allows a president to be elected in the first round without a runoff if he or she wins at least 40% of the vote and defeats the person who came in second place by at least 10%. So, Morales clearly got reelected to the presidency in the first round. …
The second reason [why the coup was done] was economically motivated. If Venezuela has oil, Bolivia has lithium: lots of lithium. In fact, Bolivia may have 70% of the world’s lithium reserves. And lithium is the new oil. As oil is essential for gas powered cars, so lithium is essential for electric cars. Morales, like Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, is a nationalist who sought a new relationship between his land’s people and his land’s resources: he didn’t want all the wealth from Bolivia’s natural resources slipping through the fingers of the Bolivian people and into the hands of the huge international corporations. And as that approach to oil put Chavez in the sights of the American coup planners, so Morales’ approach to lithium put him in their sights.
Morales was willing to allow foreign companies into Bolivia, but he stipulated that any lithium mining had to be carried out in equal partnership with Bolivia’s national mining company and Bolivia’s national lithium company. That made Morales a problem to the big transnational mining companies. A problem that had to go.
In 2018, Germany’s ACI Systems had come to an agreement with Bolivia. Listening to the protest of the people of the region, Morales canceled that deal on November 4, 2019. A few days later, Morales was gone.
The third reason was politically motivated. After Chavez pushed the Latin American political pendulum to the left, a series of coups, elections and American meddling have pushed that pendulum back to the right. But the pendulum has a domestic mind of its own, and it has begun swinging back to the left, including in large, important countries like Mexico and Argentina. The Bolivian election may have offered America an opportunity to put its hand back on the pendulum.
The leaked coup conversations clearly identify American senators Marco Rubio, Bob Menéndez and Ted Cruz as being committed to aiding the coup. Marco Rubio’s tweets, before the vote count was even finished, set the stage early for the coup.
And that may not be the only supporting role America played. It was the Bolivian military that provided the push that triggered the coup. The chief commander of the Bolivian armed forces, Williams Kaliman, put the final and decisive pressure on Morales to resign. On November 10, Kaliman announced that the military “suggest[s] the President of the State renounce his presidential mandate.”
But Kaliman has deep ties to the US military. Though not mentioned in the mainstream media, it was reported early on in the Latin American media that Kaliman had served for several years as Bolivia’s military attaché to Washington. …
If America’s 607 billionaires had funded (via their corporations’ ads etc.) sites such as antiwar dot com as much as they fund sites such as nytimes dot com, then maybe the truth would become known as much as the lies that inundate Americans are, but the billionaires stand behind coups and rigged ‘elections’, not behind democracy anywhere; so, they don’t do any such thing.
Consequently, this is actually about a Western version of samizdat — it’s the West’s equivalent to the former Soviet Union’s systematic, and equally pervasive, truth-suppression, to fool the public into thinking that the Government represents them, no matter how much it does not. (The chief trick in this regard is to fool them into thinking that since there is more than one political party, one of them will be “good,” even though the fact may actually be that each of the parties represents simply a different faction of a psychopathically cravenous aristocracy — in this case, America’s billionaires, who control the country’s international corporations. After all: each American party lied and supported invading Iraq in 2003, Libya in 2011, and Syria constantly; and no American party acknowledges that the 2014 regime-change in Ukraine was a U.S. coup instead of having been a domestic Ukrainian democratic revolution, such as they all allege. Part of the Obama Administration’s plan for its takeover of Ukraine was to steal Russia’s Crimean naval base and to transform it into a U.S. naval base. But that portion of Obama’s coup-plan wasn’t able to be successfully executed (because Putin blocked his takeover of Crimea). On such important matters, all of those media lie, and in basically the same ways. These lies are bipartisan, even though most of the regime’s other political lies are heavily partisan — telling different things to Democrats than to Republicans. Merely having multiple political parties doesn’t necessarily mean that the country isn’t a dictatorship. The multi-party trick is crucial to America’s fascism; and, in fact, America’s Founders, who wrote the Constitution, were hoping to establish a one-party democratic government; but no mainstream U.S. medium draws attention to that uncomfortable-for-today’s-billionaires historical fact. Unprofitable truths get hidden, instead of reported.)
Right now, Julian Assange is rotting to death inside Britain’s equivalent to the U.S. regime’s Guanatanamo Bay prison, which is Belmarsh Prison, in London. As the CIA-edited and written Wikipedia’s article on Belmarsh Prison retrospectively admits, “Between 2001 and 2002, Belmarsh Prison was used to detain a number of people indefinitely without charge or trial under the provisions of the Part 4 of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, leading it to be called the ‘British version of Guantanamo Bay’.” However, only because of the case of Julian Assange is it now publicly known that this characterization of that prison is — at least for him — equally true today; he is being tortured there. And Assange is, indeed, being held in that hell-hole “indefinitely without charge or trial,” even after his having previously been held in various other forms of confinement, ever since at least 12 April 2012, when — being then ‘temporarily’ under house-arrest in Norfolk England, while awaiting trial on a manufactured rape-charge against him which was reluctantly abandoned by the Government only when the alleged victim refused to testify against him — Assange broadcast an interview for RT, Russian Television, an interview of the head of Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah. The U.S.-and-allied regimes’ billionaires-owned-and-controlled ‘news’-media condemned Assange for this interview, because it enabled whomever still had an open mind, amongst the Western public, to hear from one of those billionares’ destruction-targets (Nasrallah), and they criticized Assange for doing this on the international TV-news network of the main country that America’s billionaires are especially trying to conquer, which is (and since 26 July 1945 has consistently been) Russia. (Of course, regime-fronts such as PBS, CNN and BBC, wouldn’t have telecast any interview of Nasrallah, but U.S.-and-allied billionaires want no news-operation to do so.) The great then-independent investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald headlined about that interview, at Salon on 18 April 2012, “Attacks on RT and Assange reveal much about the critics: Those who pretend to engage in adversarial journalism will invariably hate those who actually do it.” How true that was, and unfortunately still is, in this dictatorship! And Assange himself is the best example of the regime’s hypocrisies. Greenwald wrote:
Let’s examine the unstated premises at work here. There is apparently a rule that says it’s perfectly OK for a journalist to work for a media outlet owned and controlled by a weapons manufacturer (GE/NBC/MSNBC), or by the U.S. and British governments (BBC/Stars & Stripes/Voice of America), or by Rupert Murdoch and Saudi Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal (Wall St. Journal/Fox News), or by a banking corporation with long-standing ties to right-wing governments (Politico), or by for-profit corporations whose profits depend upon staying in the good graces of the U.S. government (Kaplan/The Washington Post), or by loyalists to one of the two major political parties (National Review/TPM/countless others), but it’s an intrinsic violation of journalistic integrity to work for a media outlet owned by the Russian government. Where did that rule come from?
Then, after ‘temporary’ house-arrest there, Assange was allowed asylum by Ecuador’s progressive President Rafael Correa on 20 June 2012, to stay in London’s Ecuadoran Embassy, so as not to be seized by the UK regime to be sent to prison and probable death-without-trial in the U.S. To Correa’s shock, it turned out that Correa’s successor, Vice President Lenin Moreno, behaved actually as a U.S. agent, promptly forcing Assange out of the Embassy, into Belmarsh prison, to die there or else become extradited to die in a U.S. prison, also without trial.
So: for what is Assange being imprisoned, and perhaps murdered? He divulged government secrets that should never even have been secrets! His ‘crime’ was to reveal truths. He raised the blanket of lies, which covers over these actually dictatorial clandestine international actions. He exposed these evil imperialistic operations, which are hidden behind (and under) the blanket of imperialists’ lies. For this, he is being martyred — he martyrs for democracy, in countries where there is no actual democracy (but only those lies).
Here is an example of the lies for which his Wikileaks places itself on the block even now:
On December 29th, I headlined “Further Proof: U.S., UK, & France Committed War-Crime on 14 April 2018” and reported highlights of the latest Wikileaks document-dumps regarding a U.S.-UK-French operation to cover-up (via their control over the OPCW) these three regimes having committed an international war-crime when they had fired 105 missiles against Syria on 14 April 2018, which was done allegedly to punish Syria for having perpetrated a gas-attack in Douma seven days before — except that there hadn’t been any such gas-attack, but the OPCW simply lied and said that there might have been one, and that the Syrian Government might have done it, even though the management had been informed by their own technical staff that all of this was false! That’s playing the public for suckers, and it’s what the OPCW now does.
Back on 3 November 2019, Fox News bannered “Fox News Poll: Bipartisan majorities want some U.S. troops to stay in Syria” and reported that when citing ISIS as America’s enemy that must be defeated, 69% of U.S. respondents wanted U.S. troops to stay in Syria. But when did ISIS ever constitute a threat to U.S. national security? And under what international law is any U.S. soldier, who is inside Syria, anything other than an invader there? The answer, to both of these questions, is obviously “never” and “none.” Syria has repeatedly ordered all uninvited foreigners out and declared them to be alien invaders. (Russian troops, by contrast, were invited in and actually started the operation against ISIS in Syria, which embarrassed the U.S. then to join in on that, even while the U.S. assisted ISIS forces in Iraq to escape into Syria (so as to help overthrow its secular Government) — supreme hypocrisy.) But if you are an investor in Lockheed Martin, don’t you want the American people to be suckers about both? And, so, they are. People such as Julian Assange don’t want the public anywhere to be lied-to. Anyone who is in the propaganda-business — serving companies such as Lockheed Martin — wants the public to be suckers. (How else will U.S. taxpayers willingly support their constantly funding the world’s most corrupt military?)
Whereas Russian media openly state that Qasem Soleimani was the world’s most effective general against ISIS, no U.S. media do, but some of them provide buried in a report facts which support the conclusion, such as here and here and here, and some news-media of other nations (even of India) also are more public about the fact. (Even in anti-Muslim India, General Suleimani is recognized as having been a global leader in the battles against both ISIS and the Taliban — both of which fundamentalist-Sunni groups threaten India.) So, on January 3rd, Trump assassinated the world’s most effective general who led the elimination of ISIS. And the U.S. Government calls Soleimani a ‘terrorist’, because America’s billionaires want to grab Iran back.
Sometimes, however, political partisanship in America does make public, to the supporters of one Party, the lies that are being told by a representative of another Party, such as happened, for example, on January 4th when the Democratic Party propaganda-organ Huffington Post headlined “Mike Pence Slammed After Falsely Linking Qassem Soleimani To 9/11: Neither Iran nor Soleimani were linked to the terror attack in the 9/11 Commission report. Pence didn’t even get the number of hijackers right.” However, even when that happens, the public aren’t being informed that the problem is all of America’s billionaires — of both Parties — and not merely the billionaires who finance the careers of the public officials in ‘the opposite’ Party.
This is the way the free market actually works. It works by lying, and in such a country the Government serves the people who have the money, and not the people who don’t. The people who don’t have the money are instead supposed to be lied-to (such as to buy whatever the billionaires’ firms sell). And, so, they are. But this is not democracy. Democracy, in fact, is impossible if the public are predominantly deceived. If the public are predominantly deceived, then the people who do the deceiving will be the dictators there. And, if a country has dictators, then it’s no democracy. In a totally free market, only the people with the most money will have any freedom at all; most of the public will be merely their suckers, who are fooled by the professionals at doing that — lying. Who, ultimately, will be paying by far the vast majority of those professionals? Of course, the owners of the U.S.-based international corporations will be.
The super-rich enforce their smears, and their other lies, by hiring professionals to do this.
When Barack Obama said that “The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation” — so that each other nation is “dispensable” — he was merely exemplifying the view that only the most powerful is indispensable, and that therefore everyone else is dispensable. Of course, this is the way that he, and Donald Trump, both have governed in the U.S. And Americans overwhelmingly endorse this viewpoint. They’re fooled by both parties, because both parties serve only their respective billionaires — and because billionaires are above the law; they are the law, in America and its allied regimes. That’s the way it is.
This is the American gospel, and it’s called “capitalism.” That’s any kind of capitalism, not only democratic, but even facsist — i.e., dictatorial capitalism. Oddly, after Russia switched to capitalism in 1991, the American gospel switched instead to pure global conquest — über-imperialism (now called in America “neoconservatism,” but it’s just ordinary fascist imperialism, indistinguishable from the Axis powers of WW II) — and the American public didn’t even blink. So: nowadays, capitalism has come to mean über-imperialism. That’s today’s American gospel. It’s a certain type of capitalism — a very ugly type. This is fascism. Adolf Hitler would be smiling, upon today’s Amerika.
And, as far as whistleblowers — such as Julian Assange, and Edward Snowden, and Chelsea Manning, and other champions of honesty and of democracy — are concerned: Americans agree with the billionaires, who detest and destroy such whistleblowers. Champions of democracy are shunned here, where PR reigns, and real journalism is almost non-existent (except at a few of the small independent online news sites including this, but most even most of the small online sites parrot one or the other of the U.S. political Party’s viewpoints, against all the other Parties, in order to pretend to be ‘anti-Establishment’ — which isn’t the same thing as being truly independent).
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-29--Turnbull trashes Morrison, Abbot & Trump as ‘climate change deniers’ (Video)

The Duran ’ s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the BBC interview with former Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull , who sounded off about the fires raging in Australia , placing the blame squarely on current Australian PM Scott Morrison .
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute .
The Duran Audio Podcast : Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes .
Australian PM Scott Morrison has been accused of lacking leadership during the bushfire crisis – by the man he replaced after a party room coup .
Malcolm Turnbull , who was deposed in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Morrison had misled the country by “ downplaying ” the influence of global warming .
Mr Morrison apologised last month for taking a US holiday amid the fires .
He has insisted his policies are adequate .
But Mr Turnbull said he “ can not explain ” his successor ’ s approach .
In a wide-ranging interview , Mr Turnbull also said US President Donald Trump was the world ’ s “ leading climate denier ” and that America ’ s lack of leadership was “ extremely damaging ” .
Mr Turnbull said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very dry time ” before the fire season , and that it “ was likely to be very bad ” .
“ Rather than doing what a leader should do… [ Mr Morrison ] downplayed it , and at times discounted the influence of climate change , which is just nonsense from a scientific point of view .
So that ’ s misleading people , ” said Mr Turnbull .
“ Then of course [ he ] chose to go away on holiday in Hawaii at the peak of the crisis .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that .
“ It ’ s just not consistent with the way in which a prime minister would or should act in a national crisis like this.
” Since September , bushfires have scarred Australia .
At least 30 people have died , livelihoods have been lost along with thousands of homes , while the catastrophic impact on wildlife may never be known .
Mr Morrison has conceded he caused “ great anxiety in Australia ” by taking his family to the US as record-breaking heat exacerbated fires .
“ I know there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make political points and score points in the midst of these disasters , and that ’ s disappointing , ” he said before Christmas .
He asserted that climate change was “ one of many factors ” responsible for the blazes .
As the fires have raged , so has the debate about climate change and its part in Australia ’ s destructive summer .
Mr Turnbull took aim at former colleagues in the governing Liberal Party , accusing another ex-prime minister , Tony Abbott , of being “ probably the most prominent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there are plenty of others ” who were engaged in a “ war against science ” .
“ It is an extraordinarily irrational and self-destructive approach , ” Mr Turnbull said .
Mr Turnbull ’ s prime ministership began in 2015 when he removed Mr Abbott , a long-time rival .
He was in power for three years before being ousted in similar fashion .
It was a fevered period in Australian politics , and Mr Turnbull was castigated by a senior minister as being spiteful and indecisive .
He also faced criticism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power .
Shortly before he was replaced , Mr Turnbull abandoned his commitment to set an emissions reduction target in legislation , in what critics viewed as a last-ditch concession to his party ’ s right wing .
Australia ’ s emissions target has long been criticised as inadequate for a wealthy nation .
The 2030 target of a 26 % reduction on 2005 levels is one of the weakest among G20 nations .
But the University of Oxford graduate , and former barrister and banker , told the BBC he had been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The right [ wing ] in the Liberal Party essentially operate like terrorists , ” he said .
“ Now I ’ m not suggesting that they use guns and bombs or anything like that , but their approach is one of intimidation .
“ And they basically say to the rest of the party… if you don ’ t do what we want , we will blow the show up .
Famously one of the coup leaders said to me , ‘ you have to give in to the terrorists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sydney ’ s harbour are small-framed photographs of Mr Turnbull with world leaders : former US president Barack Obama , Indian PM Narendra Modi and Indonesian president Joko Widodo .
There is also a picture with Mr Trump .
Not so much a happy snap – the pair famously clashed over a refugee swap deal and there ’ s hostility , too , over the environment .
“ Trump is playing a very destructive role in terms of climate action .
Trump makes no bones about it .
He says global warming is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Trump is trying to put a brake on global action to reduce emissions .
The lack of American leadership is extremely damaging.
” He added : “ How many more coral reefs have to be bleached ?
How many more million hectares of forest have to be burned ?
“ How many more lives and homes have to be lost before the climate change deniers acknowledge they are wrong ?
”

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the BBC interview with former Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull, who sounded off about the fires raging in Australia, placing the blame squarely on current Australian PM Scott Morrison.
Support Free Speech:
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute.
The Duran Audio Podcast:
Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes.
Via BBC…
Australian PM Scott Morrison has been accused of lacking leadership during the bushfire crisis – by the man he replaced after a party room coup.
Malcolm Turnbull, who was deposed in 2018, told the BBC that Mr Morrison had misled the country by “downplaying” the influence of global warming.
Mr Morrison apologised last month for taking a US holiday amid the fires. He has insisted his policies are adequate.
But Mr Turnbull said he “cannot explain” his successor’s approach.
In a wide-ranging interview, Mr Turnbull also said US President Donald Trump was the world’s “leading climate denier” and that America’s lack of leadership was “extremely damaging”.
Mr Turnbull said “everybody knew we were in a very dry time” before the fire season, and that it “was likely to be very bad”.
“Rather than doing what a leader should do… [Mr Morrison] downplayed it, and at times discounted the influence of climate change, which is just nonsense from a scientific point of view. So that’s misleading people,” said Mr Turnbull.
“Then of course [he] chose to go away on holiday in Hawaii at the peak of the crisis. So I can’t explain any of that.
“It’s just not consistent with the way in which a prime minister would or should act in a national crisis like this.”
Since September, bushfires have scarred Australia. At least 30 people have died, livelihoods have been lost along with thousands of homes, while the catastrophic impact on wildlife may never be known.
Mr Morrison has conceded he caused “great anxiety in Australia” by taking his family to the US as record-breaking heat exacerbated fires.
“I know there are some who’ve tried to make political points and score points in the midst of these disasters, and that’s disappointing,” he said before Christmas.
He asserted that climate change was “one of many factors” responsible for the blazes.
As the fires have raged, so has the debate about climate change and its part in Australia’s destructive summer.
Mr Turnbull took aim at former colleagues in the governing Liberal Party, accusing another ex-prime minister, Tony Abbott, of being “probably the most prominent climate denier in Australian politics, but there are plenty of others” who were engaged in a “war against science”.
“It is an extraordinarily irrational and self-destructive approach,” Mr Turnbull said.
Mr Turnbull’s prime ministership began in 2015 when he removed Mr Abbott, a long-time rival. He was in power for three years before being ousted in similar fashion.
It was a fevered period in Australian politics, and Mr Turnbull was castigated by a senior minister as being spiteful and indecisive. He also faced criticism externally for not doing more while in power.
Shortly before he was replaced, Mr Turnbull abandoned his commitment to set an emissions reduction target in legislation, in what critics viewed as a last-ditch concession to his party’s right wing.
Australia’s emissions target has long been criticised as inadequate for a wealthy nation. The 2030 target of a 26% reduction on 2005 levels is one of the weakest among G20 nations.
But the University of Oxford graduate, and former barrister and banker, told the BBC he had been the victim of a ruthless political insurgency.
“The right [wing] in the Liberal Party essentially operate like terrorists,” he said.
“Now I’m not suggesting that they use guns and bombs or anything like that, but their approach is one of intimidation.
“And they basically say to the rest of the party… if you don’t do what we want, we will blow the show up. Famously one of the coup leaders said to me, ‘you have to give in to the terrorists’.”
In his offices overlooking Sydney’s harbour are small-framed photographs of Mr Turnbull with world leaders: former US president Barack Obama, Indian PM Narendra Modi and Indonesian president Joko Widodo.
There is also a picture with Mr Trump. Not so much a happy snap – the pair famously clashed over a refugee swap deal and there’s hostility, too, over the environment.
“Trump is playing a very destructive role in terms of climate action. Trump makes no bones about it. He says global warming is rubbish,” Mr Turnbull said.
“Trump is trying to put a brake on global action to reduce emissions. The lack of American leadership is extremely damaging.”
He added: “How many more coral reefs have to be bleached? How many more million hectares of forest have to be burned?
“How many more lives and homes have to be lost before the climate change deniers acknowledge they are wrong?”
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-29--EXCLUSIVE: OPCW cover up & possible sarin execution by west backed ‘moderate rebels’  (Video)

The Duran ’ s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss disturbing revelations from a House of Commons presentation in London , that the Douma , Syria chlorine false flag involved a sinister sarin execution and staged canister shells .
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute .
The Duran Audio Podcast : Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes .
The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons ( OPCW ) needs to salvage its reputation after whistleblowers offered credible evidence of deceitful reporting on the Douma incident , a former head of UK commandos @ @ @ @ @ @ @ watchdog is under increasing pressure to come clean about how it prepared its report into the April 2018 incident in the Damascus suburb .
Several scientists from the watchdog blew the whistle , alleging that the findings by inspectors who went on a fact-finding mission to Syria had been distorted or ignored by the OPCW ’ s management , which was more concerned with putting the blame on the Syrian government than with uncovering the truth .
John Taylor Holmes , a retired major general who served as a director of special forces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which heard testimony from one of the whistleblowers , identified as ‘ Alex.
’ The general said the evidence provided by the scientist and the rest of the team “ was very convincing ” .
“ Native English speaker , he was a senior member of the OPCW .
He was extremely well-qualified for the job .
And I can not think of a reason why he became a whistleblower other than he felt very strongly that the final report had not reflected the findings , ” Holmes told RT ’ s Going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before OPCW inspectors could reach Douma , the US , the UK , and France conducted a nighttime missile raid against what they claimed were sites involved in Syria ’ s alleged chemical weapons program .
Their public justification for this attack has seemed increasingly shaky as whistleblowers presented evidence which contradicted the claim that Syrian aircraft had dropped canisters with chlorine gas on jihadist-held Douma .
Among other things ‘ Alex ’ reportedly described three US officials putting pressure on OPCW staff to produce a report , which would be in line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said he believed OPCW ’ s credibility needs to be saved by a series of reforms that would prevent similar scandals in the future .
“ Its value is its independence .
It can not be influenced by outside actors , ” he explained .
He agreed that the scandal had been covered up .
The scandal has been mostly ignored by Western media even despite another whistleblower , Ian Henderson , telling members of the UN Security Council that his technical report on Douma was suppressed .
Homes said he didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this one and his belief in the importance of an independent OPCW is one of the reasons he got involved in the first place .
Watch the full episode of Going Underground here .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss disturbing revelations from a House of Commons presentation in London, that the Douma, Syria chlorine false flag involved a sinister sarin execution and staged canister shells.
Support Free Speech:
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute.
The Duran Audio Podcast:
Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes.
Via RT…
The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) needs to salvage its reputation after whistleblowers offered credible evidence of deceitful reporting on the Douma incident, a former head of UK commandos has said.
The international chemical weapons watchdog is under increasing pressure to come clean about how it prepared its report into the April 2018 incident in the Damascus suburb. Several scientists from the watchdog blew the whistle, alleging that the findings by inspectors who went on a fact-finding mission to Syria had been distorted or ignored by the OPCW’s management, which was more concerned with putting the blame on the Syrian government than with uncovering the truth.
John Taylor Holmes, a retired major general who served as a director of special forces, was on a panel of experts which heard testimony from one of the whistleblowers, identified as ‘Alex.’ The general said the evidence provided by the scientist and the rest of the team “was very convincing”.
“Native English speaker, he was a senior member of the OPCW. He was extremely well-qualified for the job. And I cannot think of a reason why he became a whistleblower other than he felt very strongly that the final report had not reflected the findings,” Holmes told RT’s Going Underground program.
Following the incident and before OPCW inspectors could reach Douma, the US, the UK, and France conducted a nighttime missile raid against what they claimed were sites involved in Syria’s alleged chemical weapons program. Their public justification for this attack has seemed increasingly shaky as whistleblowers presented evidence which contradicted the claim that Syrian aircraft had dropped canisters with chlorine gas on jihadist-held Douma. Among other things ‘Alex’ reportedly described three US officials putting pressure on OPCW staff to produce a report, which would be in line with the accusations against Damascus.
Holmes said he believed OPCW’s credibility needs to be saved by a series of reforms that would prevent similar scandals in the future.
“Its value is its independence. It cannot be influenced by outside actors,” he explained.
He agreed that the scandal had been covered up. The scandal has been mostly ignored by Western media even despite another whistleblower, Ian Henderson, telling members of the UN Security Council that his technical report on Douma was suppressed. Homes said he didn’t recall another cover-up as scandalous as this one and his belief in the importance of an independent OPCW is one of the reasons he got involved in the first place.
Watch the full episode of Going Underground here.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-30--Is Singapore About to Become a U.S. Military Hub Against China?

Submitted by InfoBrics , authored by Paul Antonopoulos , Research Fellow at the Center for Syncretic Studies… Singapore , a small but well-armed island nation in Southeast Asia , with 72,000 troops in the army , was approved by the United States in early January 2020 to acquire 12 F-35Bs , along with necessary equipment such as spare engines , parts , electronics , equipment , and simulators , at a contract price of $ 2.75 billion .
The Singaporean Air Force has 316 aircraft , 16 squadrons and 14,800 troops at four Air Force bases , with most of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 60 F-16s .
The Air Force is impressive but not so much compared to other regional and great powers .
Singapore ’ s Defense Minister , Ng Eng Hen , emphasized that the American made war planes is intended to gradually replace the F-16 fighter that is now mostly used by the Singaporean Air Force – and this could be a gamechanger against Chinese interests in the region .
With Singapore ’ s acquisition of these aircraft , it could drastically change the arms balance in the South China Sea region where China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even beyond .
This small island nation has a close alliance with the United States and has also joined the United Kingdom , Australia , New Zealand and Malaysia – all Commonwealth countries – in a military agreement known as the Five Powers Defence Arrangements .
Singapore is also providing full support to the U.S. by allowing them use of the Paya Lebar Air Force Base , and U.S. warships can call at Sembawang Naval Base .
The visits by U.S. Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump to the Paya Lebar base during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington ’ s trust in Singapore and recognizes the critical geostrategic location of Singapore on international trades .
The Paya Lebar Air Base is home to 40 F-15s , and is also home to five aerial refuelling aircraft , the KC-130B .
Changi East Air Base is equipped with 20 F-16s and four A330 MRTT aerial refuelling aircraft .
The A330 MRTT ’ s are essentially a refuelling machine tied to a fighter .
This greatly increases the radius of action .
Not only can the F-35 be refuelled in the air , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , especially American , aircraft carriers .
For example , an American Wasp-class assault ship can support the F-35 ’ s offensive actions .
Singapore is located on a junction of the Malacca Straits , a crucial sea lane in Southeast Asia that has about 50,000 mercantile ships pass through every year .
The Malacca Straits , strategically and economically , is one of the most important sea lanes in the entire world , in equal importance to the Suez and Panama Canals .
This is because the Malacca Straits is the main @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Pacific Ocean .
The route runs along the southern shore of the island and Singapore controls the airspace above it , making it one of the most important sea lanes in the world , especially for international Chinese trade and the Belt and Road Initiative .
It is for this reason that Singapore has become another flashpoint in the China-U.S. rivalry in the region as any blockage of this sea lane from Chinese ships will significantly impact China ’ s economy .
Although Singapore is more aligned with the U.S. , its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
However , the acquisition of the U.S.-made F-35 ’ s aims to create the island country into a powerful Small Power in one of the most important geostrategic locations in the world .
The F-35 creates many advantages in the Malacca Straits for the U.S. and Singapore .
In the event of a war in the region the Straits could be closed to China , creating significant economic and logistical problems for China ’ s engagement with the rest of the world .
In this way , Singapore ’ s acquisition of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Straits , which is critical for military and commercial navigation , but also the possibility for the U.S. and Singapore to quickly dispatching reinforcements to areas where potential combat in the South China Sea , Taiwan and the Korean Peninsula , could occur .
With Singapore ’ s F-35B , the small island country can also appear in unexpected places all across the region to assist their American allies in anti-China operations .
It is likely that Washington is turning Singapore into an important U.S. hub in the region to enact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ever-increasing influence of China in Southeast Asia .
With Singapore becoming a regional hub for the U.S. military , there is the possibility that the U.S. Air Force can reduce its reliance on air refuelling and facilitates in possible combat operations .
Therefore , there is little doubt that Singapore ’ s latest acquisition of these powerful warplanes is to further consolidate Singapore ’ s alliance with the U.S. and Commonwealth states who overwhelmingly represent the Old Order of the world system and are yet to accept the realities of the Multipolar System @

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by Paul Antonopoulos, Research Fellow at the Center for Syncretic Studies…
Singapore, a small but well-armed island nation in Southeast Asia, with 72,000 troops in the army, was approved by the United States in early January 2020 to acquire 12 F-35Bs, along with necessary equipment such as spare engines, parts, electronics, equipment, and simulators, at a contract price of $2.75 billion. The Singaporean Air Force has 316 aircraft, 16 squadrons and 14,800 troops at four Air Force bases, with most of the offensive power being 40 F-15s and 60 F-16s. The Air Force is impressive but not so much compared to other regional and great powers. Singapore’s Defense Minister, Ng Eng Hen, emphasized that the American made war planes is intended to gradually replace the F-16 fighter that is now mostly used by the Singaporean Air Force – and this could be a gamechanger against Chinese interests in the region.
With Singapore’s acquisition of these aircraft, it could drastically change the arms balance in the South China Sea region where China and the U.S. are competing, and even beyond. This small island nation has a close alliance with the United States and has also joined the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Malaysia – all Commonwealth countries – in a military agreement known as the Five Powers Defence Arrangements. Singapore is also providing full support to the U.S. by allowing them use of the Paya Lebar Air Force Base, and U.S. warships can call at Sembawang Naval Base. The visits by U.S. Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump to the Paya Lebar base during their visit to the region also demonstrates Washington’s trust in Singapore and recognizes the critical geostrategic location of Singapore on international trades.
The Paya Lebar Air Base is home to 40 F-15s, and is also home to five aerial refuelling aircraft, the KC-130B. Changi East Air Base is equipped with 20 F-16s and four A330 MRTT aerial refuelling aircraft. The A330 MRTT’s are essentially a refuelling machine tied to a fighter. This greatly increases the radius of action. Not only can the F-35 be refuelled in the air, but it can also land on allied, especially American, aircraft carriers. For example, an American Wasp-class assault ship can support the F-35’s offensive actions.
Singapore is located on a junction of the Malacca Straits, a crucial sea lane in Southeast Asia that has about 50,000 mercantile ships pass through every year. The Malacca Straits, strategically and economically, is one of the most important sea lanes in the entire world, in equal importance to the Suez and Panama Canals. This is because the Malacca Straits is the main sea route connecting the Indian Ocean with the Pacific Ocean. The route runs along the southern shore of the island and Singapore controls the airspace above it, making it one of the most important sea lanes in the world, especially for international Chinese trade and the Belt and Road Initiative. It is for this reason that Singapore has become another flashpoint in the China-U.S. rivalry in the region as any blockage of this sea lane from Chinese ships will significantly impact China’s economy.
Although Singapore is more aligned with the U.S., its air force does not match its ambitions. However, the acquisition of the U.S.-made F-35’s aims to create the island country into a powerful Small Power in one of the most important geostrategic locations in the world. The F-35 creates many advantages in the Malacca Straits for the U.S. and Singapore. In the event of a war in the region the Straits could be closed to China, creating significant economic and logistical problems for China’s engagement with the rest of the world.
In this way, Singapore’s acquisition of modern aircraft means not only increased control of the Straits, which is critical for military and commercial navigation, but also the possibility for the U.S. and Singapore to quickly dispatching reinforcements to areas where potential combat in the South China Sea, Taiwan and the Korean Peninsula, could occur. With Singapore’s F-35B, the small island country can also appear in unexpected places all across the region to assist their American allies in anti-China operations.
It is likely that Washington is turning Singapore into an important U.S. hub in the region to enact and serve its interests and prevent the ever-increasing influence of China in Southeast Asia. With Singapore becoming a regional hub for the U.S. military, there is the possibility that the U.S. Air Force can reduce its reliance on air refuelling and facilitates in possible combat operations. Therefore, there is little doubt that Singapore’s latest acquisition of these powerful warplanes is to further consolidate Singapore’s alliance with the U.S. and Commonwealth states who overwhelmingly represent the Old Order of the world system and are yet to accept the realities of the Multipolar System.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-30--JCPOA collapsing due to western bad faith

In spite of the Russian Foreign Ministry ’ s best efforts , the JCPOA may very well be in the process of collapsing .
On January 14th , British , French and German officials decided to trigger the agreement ’ s Dispute Resolution Mechanism in relation to alleged Iranian non-compliance with its obligations under the deal , a move which the Russian and Chinese governments ’ view as unhelpful .
For its own part , Iran has also criticized European signatories ’ non-compliance with their own economic obligations under the JCPOA , regarding the un-freezing of Iranian assets , etc @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on January 24th stated “ For our part , we would like to confirm the existence of substantial difficulties created by the E3 ’ s decision .
Their step creates additional problems and challenges in the implementation of the JCPOA .
Besides , the above-mentioned mechanism can not be put into effect due to the absence of the necessary procedures and the Joint Commission ’ s decisions.
” On January 28th , a Russian Foreign Ministry official stated that Russia was strongly opposed to any re-imposition of sanctions on Iran , and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support in the matter .
Since January 14th , British , French and German officials have urged the Russian and Chinese governments to participate in the Dispute Resolution Mechanism .
In alleging Iranian non-compliance , the JCPOA ’ s European signatories overlook the point that the Iranian government has clearly and repeatedly stated that it would implement a phased suspension of its commitments under the JCPOA until such a time as the deal ’ s other signatories came into full compliance .
For example , on September 29th last year , the International @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been enriching uranium to a purity of 4.35 % , which marginally exceeds the limit of 3.67 % stipulated under the terms of the JCPOA , and Iran has exceeded the limit of 300 kilograms of stockpiled nuclear fuel which is permitted under the terms of the deal .
The Iranian explanation of its step back from these commitments has been clear and consistent – Iran can not meet all of its obligations under the deal while the other signatories refuse to do so .
Admittedly , the decision by the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re-impose sanctions on Iran in May 2018 has made it difficult for European signatories to come into full compliance , as the un-freezing of Iranian assets in European countries and the full enabling of trade with Iran would make European financial institutions themselves secondary targets for US sanctions .
The crucial point is that all dollar-denominated transactions worldwide technically come under US legal jurisdiction .
However , the Iranian government can hardly be held responsible for this lack of resolve and geo-political weakness on the part of the deal ’ s European signatories @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government , in particular , has a destabilizing effect .
During Chancellor Merkel ’ s meeting with President Putin in Moscow on January 11th , both leaders re-stated their commitment to saving the JCPOA at all costs .
They also jointly confirmed that the Nord Stream 2 project would go ahead in spite of US sanctions .
3 days later , German , French and British diplomats trigger the Dispute Resolution Mechanism , throwing the entire future of the JCPOA into serious doubt .
Only 12 days after Merkel ’ s highly productive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military exercises held in Europe for 25 years take place , highly concentrated on German territory but focusing on the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad .
What exactly is Merkel trying to achieve here ?
One usually associates these kinds of cheap moves and this kind of obsessionally short-termist tactical oscillation with Erdogan .
What kind of advantage can Merkel hope might accrue to Germany through such a demonstration of bad faith ?
Maybe she just wanted to put Nord Stream 2 in her pocket before she left Moscow .
This kind of non-stop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as to why no western European nation-state , not even the EU hegemon , has any meaningful level of geo-political reach .
Due to the infantilization of Europe ’ s political class , they are simply incapable of formulating or maintaining a consistent policy on external relations .
Playing your suitors off against each other and sending new mixed signals every 5 minutes is not a policy .
It ’ s a symptom of incoherence and strategic impotence .
For the first time on January 22nd , the Iranian side began to openly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than mere suspension of some of its commitments under the agreement .
The Iranian Presidential Chief of Staff Mahmoud Vaezi raised this possibility as a for-instance .
His preparedness to do so explicitly was a strong signal that Tehran has finally begun to lose patience with her western partners , and that the JCPOA may very well be in its death-spiral .
This breakdown in trust simply may not be redeemable .
We should bear in mind that the central issue with regard to Iran ’ s nuclear program has never been the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The thing which has worried both the United States and the western European powers most is simply that Iran might build a more technologically modern and efficient economy .
The Iranian government has consistently stated that its only motivation for pursuing its nuclear program is that gasoline is too valuable to be used for domestic electricity-production .
The western alliance fears Iran ’ s endeavours toward economic and technological self-strengthening .
They see it as more desirable to keep Iran in a state of economic dependency , as an under-developed natural resource @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same strategic purpose which the combination of tariffs-regimes and gunboat-diplomacy did during the 19th century , to maintain one-sided economic relationships .
With that in mind , we have to ponder the question as to whether the JCPOA ’ s European signatories are simply demonstrating extreme weakness and lack of resolve in the face of American economic coercion , or if they simply never entered into the JCPOA in good faith in the first place .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by Padraig McGrath, political analyst…
In spite of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s best efforts, the JCPOA may very well be in the process of collapsing. On January 14th, British, French and German officials decided to trigger the agreement’s Dispute Resolution Mechanism in relation to alleged Iranian non-compliance with its obligations under the deal, a move which the Russian and Chinese governments’ view as unhelpful. For its own part, Iran has also criticized European signatories’ non-compliance with their own economic obligations under the JCPOA, regarding the un-freezing of Iranian assets, etc.
A Russian Foreign Ministry statement released on January 24th stated “For our part, we would like to confirm the existence of substantial difficulties created by the E3’s decision. Their step creates additional problems and challenges in the implementation of the JCPOA. Besides, the above-mentioned mechanism cannot be put into effect due to the absence of the necessary procedures and the Joint Commission’s decisions.” On January 28th, a Russian Foreign Ministry official stated that Russia was strongly opposed to any re-imposition of sanctions on Iran, and that Iran could count on Russia’s support in the matter. Since January 14th, British, French and German officials have urged the Russian and Chinese governments to participate in the Dispute Resolution Mechanism.
In alleging Iranian non-compliance, the JCPOA’s European signatories overlook the point that the Iranian government has clearly and repeatedly stated that it would implement a phased suspension of its commitments under the JCPOA until such a time as the deal’s other signatories came into full compliance. For example, on September 29th last year, the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed that Iran has been enriching uranium to a purity of 4.35%, which marginally exceeds the limit of 3.67% stipulated under the terms of the JCPOA, and Iran has exceeded the limit of 300 kilograms of stockpiled nuclear fuel which is permitted under the terms of the deal. The Iranian explanation of its step back from these commitments has been clear and consistent – Iran cannot meet all of its obligations under the deal while the other signatories refuse to do so.
Admittedly, the decision by the United States to unilaterally withdraw from the JCPOA and re-impose sanctions on Iran in May 2018 has made it difficult for European signatories to come into full compliance, as the un-freezing of Iranian assets in European countries and the full enabling of trade with Iran would make European financial institutions themselves secondary targets for US sanctions. The crucial point is that all dollar-denominated transactions worldwide technically come under US legal jurisdiction. However, the Iranian government can hardly be held responsible for this lack of resolve and geo-political weakness on the part of the deal’s European signatories.
The tactical oscillation of the German government, in particular, has a destabilizing effect. During Chancellor Merkel’s meeting with President Putin in Moscow on January 11th, both leaders re-stated their commitment to saving the JCPOA at all costs. They also jointly confirmed that the Nord Stream 2 project would go ahead in spite of US sanctions.
3 days later, German, French and British diplomats trigger the Dispute Resolution Mechanism, throwing the entire future of the JCPOA into serious doubt.
Only 12 days after Merkel’s highly productive meeting with Putin, the largest NATO military exercises held in Europe for 25 years take place, highly concentrated on German territory but focusing on the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad.
What exactly is Merkel trying to achieve here?
One usually associates these kinds of cheap moves and this kind of obsessionally short-termist tactical oscillation with Erdogan.
What kind of advantage can Merkel hope might accrue to Germany through such a demonstration of bad faith? Maybe she just wanted to put Nord Stream 2 in her pocket before she left Moscow.
This kind of non-stop geo-political flip-flopping serves as a partial explanation as to why no western European nation-state, not even the EU hegemon, has any meaningful level of geo-political reach. Due to the infantilization of Europe’s political class, they are simply incapable of formulating or maintaining a consistent policy on external relations. Playing your suitors off against each other and sending new mixed signals every 5 minutes is not a policy. It’s a symptom of incoherence and strategic impotence.
For the first time on January 22nd, the Iranian side began to openly discuss outright withdrawal from the JCPOA rather than mere suspension of some of its commitments under the agreement. The Iranian Presidential Chief of Staff Mahmoud Vaezi raised this possibility as a for-instance. His preparedness to do so explicitly was a strong signal that Tehran has finally begun to lose patience with her western partners, and that the JCPOA may very well be in its death-spiral. This breakdown in trust simply may not be redeemable.
We should bear in mind that the central issue with regard to Iran’s nuclear program has never been the possibility of Iran developing nuclear weapons capability. The thing which has worried both the United States and the western European powers most is simply that Iran might build a more technologically modern and efficient economy. The Iranian government has consistently stated that its only motivation for pursuing its nuclear program is that gasoline is too valuable to be used for domestic electricity-production.
The western alliance fears Iran’s endeavours toward economic and technological self-strengthening. They see it as more desirable to keep Iran in a state of economic dependency, as an under-developed natural resource colony. Sanctions today serve precisely the same strategic purpose which the combination of tariffs-regimes and gunboat-diplomacy did during the 19th century, to maintain one-sided economic relationships. With that in mind, we have to ponder the question as to whether the JCPOA’s European signatories are simply demonstrating extreme weakness and lack of resolve in the face of American economic coercion, or if they simply never entered into the JCPOA in good faith in the first place.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report