thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-08-09--Who Profits from the Beirut Blast?

Who Profits from the Beirut Blast?

Making the case that the explosion resulted from an attack The narrative that the Beirut explosion was an exclusive consequence of negligence and corruption by the current Lebanese government is now set in stone , at least in the Atlanticist sphere .
And yet , digging deeper , we find that negligence and corruption may have been fully exploited , via sabotage , to engineer it .
Security at Beirut ’ s port – the nation ’ s prime economic hub – would have to be considered a top priority .
But to adapt a line from Roman Polanski ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jake .
It ’ s Beirut.
” Those by now iconic 2,750 tons of ammonium nitrate arrived in Beirut in September 2013 on board the Rhosus , a ship under Moldovan flag sailing from Batumi in Georgia to Mozambique .
Rhosus ended up being impounded by Beirut ’ s Port State Control .
Subsequently the ship was de facto abandoned by its owner , shady businessman Igor Grechushkin , born in Russia and a resident of Cyprus , who suspiciously “ lost interest ” in his relatively precious cargo , not even trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to pay off his debts .
Grechushkin never paid his crew , who barely survived for several months before being repatriated on humanitarian grounds .
The Cypriot government confirmed there was no request to Interpol from Lebanon to arrest him .
The whole op feels like a cover – with the real recipients of the ammonium nitrate possibly being “ moderate rebels ” in Syria who use it to make IEDs and equip suicide trucks , such as the one that demolished the Al Kindi hospital in Aleppo .
The 2,750 tons – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ HD ” – were transferred to the Hangar 12 warehouse by the quayside .
What followed was an astonishing case of serial negligence .
From 2014 to 2017 letters from customs officials – a series of them – as well as proposed options to get rid of the dangerous cargo , exporting it or otherwise selling it , were simply ignored .
Every time they tried to get a legal decision to dispose of the cargo , they got no answer from the Lebanese judiciary .
When Lebanese Prime Minister Hassan Diab now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the price , ” context is absolutely essential .
Neither the prime minister nor the president nor any of the cabinet ministers knew that the ammonium nitrate was stored in Hangar 12 , former Iranian diplomat Amir Mousavi , the director of the Center for Strategic Studies and International Relations in Tehran , confirms .
We ’ re talking about a massive IED , placed mid-city .
The bureaucracy at Beirut ’ s port and the mafias who are actually in charge are closely linked to , among others , the al-Mostaqbal faction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minister Saad al-Hariri , himself fully backed by the House of Saud .
The immensely corrupt Hariri was removed from power in October 2019 amid serious protests .
His cronies “ disappeared ” at least $ 20 billion from Lebanon ’ s treasury – which seriously aggravated the nation ’ s currency crisis .
No wonder the current government – where we have Prime Minister Diab backed by Hezbollah – had not been informed about the ammonium nitrate .
Ammonium nitrate is quite stable , making it one of the safest explosives used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t set it off .
It becomes highly explosive only if contaminated – for instance by oil – or heated to a point where it undergoes chemical changes that produce a sort of impermeable cocoon around it in which oxygen can build up to a dangerous level where an ignition can cause an explosion .
Why , after sleeping in Hangar 12 for seven years , did this pile suddenly feel an itch to explode ?
So far , the prime straight to the point explanation , by Middle East expert Elijah Magnier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sparked ” – literally – by a clueless blacksmith with a blowtorch operating quite close to the unsecured ammonium nitrate .
Unsecured due , once again , to negligence and corruption – or as part of an intentional “ mistake ” anticipating the possibility of a future blast .
This scenario , though , does not explain the initial “ fireworks ” explosion .
And certainly does not explain what no one – at least in the West – is talking about : the deliberate fires set to an Iranian market in Ajam @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a series of food/agricultural warehouses in Najaf , Iraq , immediately after the Beirut tragedy .
Lebanon – boasting assets and real estate worth trillions of dollars – is a juicy peach for global finance vultures .
To grab these assets at rock bottom prices , in the middle of the New Great Depression , is simply irresistible .
In parallel , the IMF vulture would embark on full shakedown mode and finally “ forgive ” some of Beirut ’ s debts as long as a harsh variation of “ structural adjustment ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and real estate worth trillions of dollars – is a juicy peach for global finance vultures .
To grab these assets at rock bottom prices , in the middle of the New Great Depression , is simply irresistible .
In parallel , the IMF vulture would embark on full shakedown mode and finally “ forgive ” some of Beirut ’ s debts as long as a harsh variation of “ structural adjustment ” is imposed .
Who profits , in this case , are the geopolitical and geoeconomic interests of US , Saudi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no accident that President Macron , a dutiful Rothschild servant , arrived in Beirut Thursday to pledge Paris neocolonial “ support ” and all but impose , like a Viceroy , a comprehensive set of “ reforms ” .
A Monty Python-infused dialogue , complete with heavy French accent , might have followed along these lines : “ We want to buy your port.
” “ It ’ s not for sale.
” “ Oh , what a pity , an accident just happened.
” Already a month ago the IMF was “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lebanon was “ accelerating.
” Prime Minister Diab had to accept the proverbial “ offer you can ’ t refuse ” and thus “ unlock billions of dollars in donor funds.
” Or else .
The non-stop run on the Lebanese currency , for over a year now , was just a – relatively polite – warning .
This is happening amid a massive global asset grab characterized in the larger context by American GDP down by almost 40 % , arrays of bankruptcies , a handful of billionaires amassing unbelievable profits and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tsunami of free money .
EDL , for instance , is responsible for 30 % of Beirut ’ s budget deficit .
That ’ s not nearly enough for the IMF and Western mega banks .
They want to gobble up the whole thing , plus a lot of real estate .
“ The economic value of public real estate can be worth at least as much as GDP and often several times the value of the operational part of any portfolio , ” say Detter and Saidi .
Once again , Israel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now widely depicted by Western corporate media as “ Lebanon ’ s Chernobyl.
” Once again , Israel is the proverbial elephant in a room now widely depicted by Western corporate media as “ Lebanon ’ s Chernobyl.
” A scenario like the Beirut catastrophe has been linked to Israeli plans since February 2016 .
Israel did admit that Hangar 12 was not a Hezbollah weapons storage unit .
Yet , crucially , on the same day of the Beirut blast , and following a series of suspicious explosions in Iran and high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minister Netanyahu tweeted , in the present tense : “ We hit a cell and now we hit the dispatchers .
We will do what is necessary in order to defend ourselves .
I suggest to all of them , including Hezbollah , to consider this.
” That ties in with the intent , openly proclaimed late last week , to bomb Lebanese infrastructure if Hezbollah harms Israeli Defense Forces soldiers or Israeli civilians .
A headline – “ Beirut Blast Shockwaves Will Be Felt by Hezbollah for a Long Time ” – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Tel Aviv is to profit from the tragedy to demonize Hezbollah , and by association , Iran .
That ties in with the US Congress “ Countering Hezbollah in Lebanon ’ s Military Act of 2019 ” { S.1886 } , which all but orders Beirut to expel Hezbollah from Lebanon .
And yet Israel has been strangely subdued .
Muddying the waters even more , Saudi intel – which has access to Mossad , and demonizes Hezbollah way more than Israel – steps in .
All the intel ops I talked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , considering the extreme sensitivity of the subject .
Still , it must be stressed that a Saudi intel source whose stock in trade is frequent information exchanges with the Mossad , asserts that the original target was Hezbollah missiles stored in Beirut ’ s port .
His story is that Prime Minister Netanyahu was about to take credit for the strike – following up on his tweet .
But then the Mossad realized the op had turned horribly wrong and metastasized into a major catastrophe .
The problem starts with the fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – as even Israel admitted .
When weapons depots are blown up , there ’ s a primary explosion followed by several smaller explosions , something that could last for days .
That ’ s not what happened in Beirut .
The initial explosion was followed by a massive second blast – almost certainly a major chemical explosion – and then there was silence .
Thierry Meyssan , very close to Syrian intel , advances the possibility that the “ attack ” was carried out with an unknown weapon , a missile -– @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Syria in January 2020 .
( The test is shown in an attached video . )
Neither Syria nor Iran ever made a reference to this unknown weapon , and I got no confirmation about its existence .
Assuming Beirut port was hit by an “ unknown weapon , ” President Trump may have told the truth : It was an “ attack ” .
And that would explain why Netanyahu , contemplating the devastation in Beirut , decided that Israel would need to maintain a very low profile .
Watch that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first sight might be seen as a deadly blow against the Belt and Road Initiative , considering that China regards the connectivity between Iran , Iraq , Syria and Lebanon as the cornerstone of the Southwest Asia Belt and Road corridor .
Yet that may backfire – badly .
China and Iran are already positioning themselves as the go-to investors post-blast , in sharp contrast with the IMF hit men , and as advised by Hezbollah Secretary-General Nasrallah only a few weeks ago .
Syria and Iran are in the forefront of providing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an emergency hospital , food packages , medicine and medical equipment .
Syria opened its borders with Lebanon , dispatched medical teams and is receiving patients from Beirut ’ s hospitals .
It ’ s always important to keep in mind that the “ attack ” ( Trump ) on Beirut ’ s port destroyed Lebanon ’ s main grain silo , apart from engineering the total destruction of the port – the nation ’ s key trade lifeline .
That would fit into a strategy of starving Lebanon .
On the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dependent on Syria for food – as it now carries only a month ’ s supply of wheat – the US attacked silos in Syria .
Syria is a huge exporter of organic wheat .
And that ’ s why the US routinely targets Syrian silos and burns its crops – attempting also to starve Syria and force Damascus , already under harsh sanctions , to spend badly needed funds to buy food .
In stark contrast to the interests of the US/France/Saudi axis , Plan A for Lebanon would be to progressively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ head straight into Belt and Road as well as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization .
Go East , the Eurasian way .
The port and even a great deal of the devastated city , in the medium term , can be quickly and professionally rebuilt by Chinese investment .
The Chinese are specialists in port construction and management .
This avowedly optimistic scenario would imply a purge of the hyper-wealthy , corrupt weapons/drugs/real estate scoundrels of Lebanon ’ s plutocracy – which in any case scurry away to their tony Paris apartments at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Hezbollah ’ s very successful social welfare system – which I saw for myself at work last year – having a shot at winning the confidence of the impoverished middle classes and thus becoming the core of the reconstruction .
It will be a Sisyphean struggle .
But compare this situation with the Empire of Chaos – which needs chaos everywhere , especially across Eurasia , to cover for the coming , Mad Max chaos inside the US .
General Wesley Clark ’ s notorious 7 countries in 5 years once again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of those 7 countries .
The Lebanese lira may have collapsed ; most Lebanese may be completely broke ; and now Beirut is semi-devastated .
That may be the straw breaking the camel ’ s back – releasing the camel to the freedom of finally retracing its steps back to Asia along the New Silk Roads .

And yet, digging deeper, we find that negligence and corruption may have been fully exploited, via sabotage, to engineer it.
The narrative that the Beirut explosion was an exclusive consequence of negligence and corruption by the current Lebanese government is now set in stone, at least in the Atlanticist sphere.
As if this were not volcanic enough, into the tragedy stepped President Trump to muddy the – already contaminated – Eastern Mediterranean waters. Briefed by “our great generals,” Trump on Tuesday said: “According to them – they would know better than I would – but they seem to think it was an attack.”
Lebanon is prime John Le Carré territory. A multinational den of spies of all shades – House of Saud agents, Zionist operatives, “moderate rebel” weaponizers, Hezbollah intellectuals, debauched Arab “royalty,” self-glorified smugglers – in a context of full spectrum economic disaster afflicting a member of the Axis of Resistance, a perennial target of Israel alongside Syria and Iran.
Still, it’s worth noting a report by Iran’s Mehr News Agency that four US Navy reconnaissance planes were spotted near Beirut at the time of the blasts. Is US intel aware of what really happened all along the spectrum of possibilities?
It’s yet another graphic illustration of the war engulfing the Beltway. Trump: attack. Pentagon: accident. “I don’t think anybody can say right now,” Trump said on Wednesday. “I’ve heard it both ways.”
Trump eventually walked his comments back after the Pentagon declined to confirm his claim about what the “generals” had said and his defense secretary, Mark Esper, supported the accident explanation for the blast.
Was this incandescent remark letting the cat out of the bag by revealing classified information? Or was the President launching another non sequitur?
That ammonium nitrate
This scenario, though, does not explain the initial “fireworks” explosion. And certainly does not explain what no one – at least in the West – is talking about: the deliberate fires set to an Iranian market in Ajam in the UAE, and also to a series of food/agricultural warehouses in Najaf, Iraq, immediately after the Beirut tragedy.
This scenario, though, does not explain the initial “fireworks” explosion. And certainly does not explain what no one – at least in the West – is talking about: the deliberate fires set to an Iranian market in Ajam in the UAE, and also to a series of food/agricultural warehouses in Najaf, Iraq, immediately after the Beirut tragedy.
So far, the prime straight to the point explanation , by Middle East expert Elijah Magnier, points to the tragedy being “sparked” – literally – by a clueless blacksmith with a blowtorch operating quite close to the unsecured ammonium nitrate. Unsecured due, once again, to negligence and corruption – or as part of an intentional “mistake” anticipating the possibility of a future blast.
Why, after sleeping in Hangar 12 for seven years, did this pile suddenly feel an itch to explode?
Ammonium nitrate is quite stable, making it one of the safest explosives used in mining. Fire normally won’t set it off. It becomes highly explosive only if contaminated – for instance by oil – or heated to a point where it undergoes chemical changes that produce a sort of impermeable cocoon around it in which oxygen can build up to a dangerous level where an ignition can cause an explosion.
No wonder the current government – where we have Prime Minister Diab backed by Hezbollah – had not been informed about the ammonium nitrate.
The immensely corrupt Hariri was removed from power in October 2019 amid serious protests. His cronies “disappeared” at least $20 billion from Lebanon’s treasury – which seriously aggravated the nation’s currency crisis.
The bureaucracy at Beirut’s port and the mafias who are actually in charge are closely linked to, among others, the al-Mostaqbal faction, which is led by former Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri, himself fully backed by the House of Saud.
Neither the prime minister nor the president nor any of the cabinet ministers knew that the ammonium nitrate was stored in Hangar 12, former Iranian diplomat Amir Mousavi, the director of the Center for Strategic Studies and International Relations in Tehran, confirms. We’re talking about a massive IED, placed mid-city.
From 2014 to 2017 letters from customs officials – a series of them – as well as proposed options to get rid of the dangerous cargo, exporting it or otherwise selling it, were simply ignored . Every time they tried to get a legal decision to dispose of the cargo, they got no answer from the Lebanese judiciary.
The 2,750 tons – packed in 1-ton bags labeled “Nitroprill HD” – were transferred to the Hangar 12 warehouse by the quayside. What followed was an astonishing case of serial negligence.
Grechushkin never paid his crew, who barely survived for several months before being repatriated on humanitarian grounds. The Cypriot government confirmed there was no request to Interpol from Lebanon to arrest him. The whole op feels like a cover – with the real recipients of the ammonium nitrate possibly being “moderate rebels” in Syria who use it to make IEDs and equip suicide trucks, such as the one that demolished the Al Kindi hospital in Aleppo.
Subsequently the ship was de facto abandoned by its owner, shady businessman Igor Grechushkin, born in Russia and a resident of Cyprus, who suspiciously “lost interest” in his relatively precious cargo, not even trying to sell it, dumping style, to pay off his debts.
Those by now iconic 2,750 tons of ammonium nitrate arrived in Beirut in September 2013 on board the Rhosus, a ship under Moldovan flag sailing from Batumi in Georgia to Mozambique. Rhosus ended up being impounded by Beirut’s Port State Control.
Security at Beirut’s port – the nation’s prime economic hub – would have to be considered a top priority. But to adapt a line from Roman Polanski’s Chinatown: “Forget it, Jake. It’s Beirut.”
Already a month ago the IMF was “warning” that “implosion” in Lebanon was “accelerating.” Prime Minister Diab had to accept the proverbial “offer you can’t refuse” and thus “unlock billions of dollars in donor funds.” Or else. The non-stop run on the Lebanese currency, for over a year now, was just a – relatively polite – warning.
Who profits, in this case, are the geopolitical and geoeconomic interests of US, Saudi Arabia and France. It’s no accident that President Macron, a dutiful Rothschild servant , arrived in Beirut Thursday to pledge Paris neocolonial “support” and all but impose, like a Viceroy, a comprehensive set of “reforms”. A Monty Python-infused dialogue, complete with heavy French accent, might have followed along these lines: “We want to buy your port.” “It’s not for sale.” “Oh, what a pity, an accident just happened.”
Lebanon – boasting assets and real estate worth trillions of dollars – is a juicy peach for global finance vultures. To grab these assets at rock bottom prices, in the middle of the New Great Depression, is simply irresistible. In parallel, the IMF vulture would embark on full shakedown mode and finally “forgive” some of Beirut’s debts as long as a harsh variation of “structural adjustment” is imposed.
This is happening amid a massive global asset grab characterized in the larger context by American GDP down by almost 40%, arrays of bankruptcies, a handful of billionaires amassing unbelievable profits and too-big-to-fail megabanks duly bailed out with a tsunami of free money.
Dag Detter, a Swedish financier, and Nasser Saidi, a former Lebanese minister and central bank vice governor, suggest that the nation’s assets be placed in a national wealth fund. Juicy assets include Electricité du Liban (EDL), water utilities, airports, the MEA airlinetelecom company OGERO, the Casino du Liban.
EDL, for instance, is responsible for 30% of Beirut’s budget deficit.
That’s not nearly enough for the IMF and Western mega banks. They want to gobble up the whole thing, plus a lot of real estate.
“The economic value of public real estate can be worth at least as much as GDP and often several times the value of the operational part of any portfolio,” say Detter and Saidi.
Who’s feeling the shockwaves?
Once again, Israel is the proverbial elephant in a room now widely depicted by Western corporate media as “Lebanon’s Chernobyl.”
A scenario like the Beirut catastrophe has been linked to Israeli plans since February 2016.
Israel did admit that Hangar 12 was not a Hezbollah weapons storage unit. Yet, crucially, on the same day of the Beirut blast, and following a series of suspicious explosions in Iran and high tension in the Syria-Israeli border, Prime Minister Netanyahu tweeted , in the present tense: “We hit a cell and now we hit the dispatchers. We will do what is necessary in order to defend ourselves. I suggest to all of them, including Hezbollah, to consider this.”
That ties in with the intent, openly proclaimed late last week, to bomb Lebanese infrastructure if Hezbollah harms Israeli Defense Forces soldiers or Israeli civilians.
A headline – “Beirut Blast Shockwaves Will Be Felt by Hezbollah for a Long Time” – confirms that the only thing that matters for Tel Aviv is to profit from the tragedy to demonize Hezbollah, and by association, Iran. That ties in with the US Congress “Countering Hezbollah in Lebanon’s Military Act of 2019” {S.1886}, which all but orders Beirut to expel Hezbollah from Lebanon.
And yet Israel has been strangely subdued.
Muddying the waters even more, Saudi intel – which has access to Mossad, and demonizes Hezbollah way more than Israel – steps in. All the intel ops I talked to refuse to go on the record, considering the extreme sensitivity of the subject.
Still, it must be stressed that a Saudi intel source whose stock in trade is frequent information exchanges with the Mossad, asserts that the original target was Hezbollah missiles stored in Beirut’s port. His story is that Prime Minister Netanyahu was about to take credit for the strike – following up on his tweet. But then the Mossad realized the op had turned horribly wrong and metastasized into a major catastrophe.
The problem starts with the fact this was not a Hezbollah weapons depot – as even Israel admitted. When weapons depots are blown up, there’s a primary explosion followed by several smaller explosions, something that could last for days. That’s not what happened in Beirut. The initial explosion was followed by a massive second blast – almost certainly a major chemical explosion – and then there was silence.
Thierry Meyssan, very close to Syrian intel, advances the possibility that the “attack” was carried out with an unknown weapon, a missile -– and not a nuclear bomb – tested in Syria in January 2020. (The test is shown in an attached video.) Neither Syria nor Iran ever made a reference to this unknown weapon, and I got no confirmation about its existence.
Assuming Beirut port was hit by an “unknown weapon,” President Trump may have told the truth: It was an “attack”. And that would explain why Netanyahu, contemplating the devastation in Beirut, decided that Israel would need to maintain a very low profile.
Watch that camel in motion
The Beirut explosion at first sight might be seen as a deadly blow against the Belt and Road Initiative, considering that China regards the connectivity between Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon as the cornerstone of the Southwest Asia Belt and Road corridor.
Yet that may backfire – badly. China and Iran are already positioning themselves as the go-to investors post-blast, in sharp contrast with the IMF hit men, and as advised by Hezbollah Secretary-General Nasrallah only a few weeks ago.
Syria and Iran are in the forefront of providing aid to Lebanon. Tehran is sending an emergency hospital, food packages, medicine and medical equipment. Syria opened its borders with Lebanon, dispatched medical teams and is receiving patients from Beirut’s hospitals.
It’s always important to keep in mind that the “attack” (Trump) on Beirut’s port destroyed Lebanon’s main grain silo, apart from engineering the total destruction of the port – the nation’s key trade lifeline.
That would fit into a strategy of starving Lebanon. On the same day Lebanon became to a great extent dependent on Syria for food – as it now carries only a month’s supply of wheat – the US attacked silos in Syria.
Syria is a huge exporter of organic wheat. And that’s why the US routinely targets Syrian silos and burns its crops – attempting also to starve Syria and force Damascus, already under harsh sanctions, to spend badly needed funds to buy food.
In stark contrast to the interests of the US/France/Saudi axis, Plan A for Lebanon would be to progressively drop out of the US-France stranglehold and head straight into Belt and Road as well as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Go East, the Eurasian way. The port and even a great deal of the devastated city, in the medium term, can be quickly and professionally rebuilt by Chinese investment. The Chinese are specialists in port construction and management.
This avowedly optimistic scenario would imply a purge of the hyper-wealthy, corrupt weapons/drugs/real estate scoundrels of Lebanon’s plutocracy – which in any case scurry away to their tony Paris apartments at the first sign of trouble.
Couple that with Hezbollah’s very successful social welfare system – which I saw for myself at work last year – having a shot at winning the confidence of the impoverished middle classes and thus becoming the core of the reconstruction.
It will be a Sisyphean struggle. But compare this situation with the Empire of Chaos – which needs chaos everywhere, especially across Eurasia, to cover for the coming, Mad Max chaos inside the US.
General Wesley Clark’s notorious 7 countries in 5 years once again come to mind – and Lebanon remains one of those 7 countries. The Lebanese lira may have collapsed; most Lebanese may be completely broke; and now Beirut is semi-devastated. That may be the straw breaking the camel’s back – releasing the camel to the freedom of finally retracing its steps back to Asia along the New Silk Roads.
(Republished from Asia Times by permission of author or representative)


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-08-09--New Cold War on the Horizon? Why China Has Nothing to Fear From Washington

-China tensions are nowhere near a decrement , as Washington has yet again poked the Dragon by clamping down on the popular Chinese app TikTok over national security concerns .
American observers have discussed the string of US anti-Beijing measures , the risks these steps are fraught with , and whether the countries will return to working relations .
The latest ban has come on the heels of a series of anti-China measures , including sanctions against senior officials of the People 's Republic and an abrupt closure of China 's Consulate in Houston .
The Economist notes that although @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take up arms '' , the points of friction and misunderstanding are accumulating , threatening to end in an outcome detrimental to both sides : `` As a presidential election draws near , the potential for dangerous miscalculation is growing '' , the media outlet warns .
What 's Behind US Crackdown Against China The current administration has been exerting pressure on Beijing since day one of Donald Trump 's presidency .
However , previously , US-Chinese frictions were mostly about trade deficit , apparent currency manipulations , and the Chinese telecom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US-Chinese ties have hit a new low .
Both Democrats and Republicans are calling for tightening the screws on the People 's Republic .
One could ask whether it was really the coronavirus pandemic , blamed by the White House on Beijing , that became the watershed in Sino-American relations .
Not really , observers say .
What matters is the November election .
The president 's effort to scapegoat China is part of his strategy to cope with mounting pressure from his opposition , according to Dr Paul Craig Roberts , an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Treasury for economic policy under President Ronald Reagan .
Besides this , there is an internal political competition among Trump 's associates , with China hawks playing the first fiddle , deems Thomas W. Pauken II , a Beijing-based Asia-Pacific affairs commentator and author of US vs China : From Trade War to Reciprocal Deal .
One of these hawks is Secretary of State Mike Pompeo , who is fanning the flames of US-China tensions in an apparent bid to score political points , according to Pauken .
Over the past few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been urging Europe and other nations to form an alliance against the People 's Republic .
While delivering his speech on 23 July at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda , California , Pompeo declared the failure of 50 years of engagement with China .
Neither of the observers believes that ramping up tensions with Beijing will bear any positive fruit .
At the same time , neither of them expects a potential direct confrontation between the powers .
However , the ex-CIA field officer envisions that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China to limit its claims to the Spratley Islands in the South China Sea '' .
`` If it comes to a trade war the US will lose because China produces many consumer items that are currently sold in America but no longer produced here '' , admits Philip Giraldi .
`` When the shelves in American stores become empty , the public will demand that the government do something about it , which will mean going back to normal relations '' .
Besides this , if pushed over the edge the People @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US bonds and currency , the economist presumes .
`` With the US dollar currently falling below its support levels , China could dump the $ 1 trillion in US government bonds it holds on the bond market '' , Dr Roberts notes .
`` This would force the Federal Reserve to protect bond prices ( and low interest rates ) by printing $ 1 trillion more dollars with which to purchase the bonds .
China could then dump the $ 1 trillion in the currency market , and the US dollar would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the end of its reserve currency role '' .
As for a much-discussed `` united front '' against Beijing , many US allies are ignoring demands to block Chinese companies and investments , the CIA veteran points out .
Recently , the UK government succumbed to pressure from the US administration and ordered British mobile providers to remove Huawei 's equipment from their networks by 2027 at an expected cost of £2 billion .
However , when it comes to the EU , the final word rests with Germany : if Berlin bars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ European states will follow its suit , The Economist foresees .
As of yet , the German government has stopped short of a Huawei ban in the upcoming 5G rollout .
For his part , Dr Roberts suggests that China should not worry about the EU stance in the long term , as the economy of Washington 's European allies is heading towards a protracted decline , just like that of the US .
`` China ’ s Silk road is not focused on the West '' , the economist underscores .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Asia , not the West , is where the future lies .
If China and Russia form a strategic alliance , that alliance will dominate the world .
The time of the West has passed '' .
Things May Get Better After Elections The US-China relationship is likely to come back on track after the November elections , predicts Thomas Pauken .
At the same time , he expects that Trump will reshuffle his cabinet , `` fire anti-China neocons in his administration and start fast-paced negotiations with Beijing over a US-China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expresses doubts that `` Pompeo will serve as US secretary of state for Trump ’ s second-term '' .
However , if Biden assumes the Oval Office , the Asia-Pacific commentator is not sure that `` peace will prevail '' , since `` many neoconservative thought leaders have endorsed Biden ’ s campaign '' and are ready to jump on his bandwagon .
`` It will get very bad this year before it improves once the election is over and things settle down in Washington '' , admits Philip Giraldi .
`` Neither @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of hostility that continues much longer and everyone knows that '' .

US -China tensions are nowhere near a decrement, as Washington has yet again poked the Dragon by clamping down on the popular Chinese app TikTok over national security concerns. American observers have discussed the string of US anti-Beijing measures, the risks these steps are fraught with, and whether the countries will return to working relations.
The latest ban has come on the heels of a series of anti-China measures, including sanctions against senior officials of the People's Republic and an abrupt closure of China's Consulate in Houston.
The Economist notes that although China and America "are not about to take up arms", the points of friction and misunderstanding are accumulating, threatening to end in an outcome detrimental to both sides: "As a presidential election draws near, the potential for dangerous miscalculation is growing", the media outlet warns.
What's Behind US Crackdown Against China
The current administration has been exerting pressure on Beijing since day one of Donald Trump's presidency. However, previously, US-Chinese frictions were mostly about trade deficit, apparent currency manipulations, and the Chinese telecom sector. Following the COVID-19 outbreak, US-Chinese ties have hit a new low. Both Democrats and Republicans are calling for tightening the screws on the People's Republic.
One could ask whether it was really the coronavirus pandemic, blamed by the White House on Beijing, that became the watershed in Sino-American relations.
Not really, observers say. What matters is the November election.
"There are certainly major issues like China's currency manipulation to increase trade and also territorial claims in the South China Sea, but the real reason is that it is an election year and it is good politics for a candidate to appear to be strong against foreign competitors and 'enemies'", says Philip Giraldi, a former CIA counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer. "This is also what occurred against Russia in 2016. Both Trump's Republicans and the Democrats are doing the same thing to be 'tough' and China is the convenient target".
The president's effort to scapegoat China is part of his strategy to cope with mounting pressure from his opposition, according to Dr Paul Craig Roberts, an American economist and former assistant secretary of the Treasury for economic policy under President Ronald Reagan.
"Trump has been prevented by the US establishment for the entirety of his term from addressing the issues on which he campaigned", Dr Roberts elaborates. "Trump has connected China via rhetoric with US job loss and is playing up conflict with China as evidence that he is trying to do something about bringing jobs home. Coronavirus, 5G, anything that can be attributed to China is helpful in presenting Trump as fighting for America".
Besides this, there is an internal political competition among Trump's associates, with China hawks playing the first fiddle, deems Thomas W. Pauken II, a Beijing-based Asia-Pacific affairs commentator and author of US vs China: From Trade War to Reciprocal Deal.
One of these hawks is Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who is fanning the flames of US-China tensions in an apparent bid to score political points, according to Pauken. Over the past few months, the US secretary of state has been urging Europe and other nations to form an alliance against the People's Republic. While delivering his speech on 23 July at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda, California, Pompeo declared the failure of 50 years of engagement with China.
Pauken draws parallels between the Trump administration's growing anti-Beijing rhetoric and plummeting poll numbers, suggesting that the anti-China strategy is "just not working to win over the voters’ hearts".
War of Words Won't Translate Into Open Conflict
Neither of the observers believes that ramping up tensions with Beijing will bear any positive fruit. At the same time, neither of them expects a potential direct confrontation between the powers.
However, the ex-CIA field officer envisions that the US "will certainly push hard on China to limit its claims to the Spratley Islands in the South China Sea".
"If it comes to a trade war the US will lose because China produces many consumer items that are currently sold in America but no longer produced here", admits Philip Giraldi. "When the shelves in American stores become empty, the public will demand that the government do something about it, which will mean going back to normal relations".
"China has nothing to fear from Washington", agrees Dr Roberts. "So much of American industry is located in China that were China to nationalise it, Wall Street would collapse".
Besides this, if pushed over the edge the People's Republic can still go nuclear on US bonds and currency, the economist presumes.
"With the US dollar currently falling below its support levels, China could dump the $1 trillion in US government bonds it holds on the bond market", Dr Roberts notes. "This would force the Federal Reserve to protect bond prices (and low interest rates) by printing $1 trillion more dollars with which to purchase the bonds. China could then dump the $1 trillion in the currency market, and the US dollar would take a major hit that could signal the end of its reserve currency role".
US Allies Unlikely to Team Up Against China
As for a much-discussed "united front" against Beijing, many US allies are ignoring demands to block Chinese companies and investments, the CIA veteran points out.
"The issue is that China is taking over key growth industries like telecommunications that once were dominated by American and European companies", Giraldi explains. "Trump would like to reverse that but China has a big lead both in the technologies themselves and the marketing".
Recently, the UK government succumbed to pressure from the US administration and ordered British mobile providers to remove Huawei's equipment from their networks by 2027 at an expected cost of £2 billion. However, when it comes to the EU, the final word rests with Germany: if Berlin bars the Chinese telecom firm, then other European states will follow its suit, The Economist foresees. As of yet, the German government has stopped short of a Huawei ban in the upcoming 5G rollout.
For his part, Dr Roberts suggests that China should not worry about the EU stance in the long term, as the economy of Washington's European allies is heading towards a protracted decline, just like that of the US.
"China’s Silk road is not focused on the West", the economist underscores. "China is focused on Asia and Africa. Asia, not the West, is where the future lies. If China and Russia form a strategic alliance, that alliance will dominate the world. The time of the West has passed".
Things May Get Better After Elections
The US-China relationship is likely to come back on track after the November elections, predicts Thomas Pauken.
"China understands that during US elections season, it’s routine for American politicians to play the anti-China card", the author says. "If Trump wins his re-election bid, he will focus on the US economic rebound. He needs China to play a more cooperative role for boosting the US economy. He’s likely to play nice with Beijing to score a much better US-China trade agreement that will be a win-win for both sides".
At the same time, he expects that Trump will reshuffle his cabinet, "fire anti-China neocons in his administration and start fast-paced negotiations with Beijing over a US-China trade deal". Thus, Pauken expresses doubts that "Pompeo will serve as US secretary of state for Trump’s second-term".
However, if Biden assumes the Oval Office, the Asia-Pacific commentator is not sure that "peace will prevail", since "many neoconservative thought leaders have endorsed Biden’s campaign" and are ready to jump on his bandwagon.
"It will get very bad this year before it improves once the election is over and things settle down in Washington", admits Philip Giraldi. "Neither party would benefit from an open state of hostility that continues much longer and everyone knows that".
The views and opinions expressed in the article do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik.


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-08-09--Trump Presses Microsoft, TikTok Into A Deal That Neither Wants – Who Profits From It?

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible .
Share with kin , friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise .
DISPATCHES FROM MOON OF ALABAMA , BY `` B '' This article is part of an ongoing series of dispatches from Moon of Alabama he Trump administration is working to dispossess the Chinese company ByteDance by blackmailing it to sell its valuable TikTok business to a U.S. company for a bargain price .
This to the benefit of yet unknown people .
False allegations over the security of TikTok user data were used to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in its U.S. market .
In the U.S. alone the app is used by more than 80 million people .
It plays an important part in the youth culture and music business .
Faced with a potential close down of its prime business in one of its most profitable markets ByteDance had no choice but to agree to negotiate about a sale .
ByteDance declined an offer by two of its U.S. based minority investors to buy the business for $ 50 billion as that price was far below its presumed value .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a new buyer with enough change to pay for a deal .
As the largest social media companies - Facebook , Apple , Google and Twitter - are already under congressional investigations for their monopoly positions in U.S. markets none of them could be the potential buyer .
Facebook has in fact just launched a rip-off of the TikTok product under the name Reels .
It is trying to poach TikTok 'creators ' for its own service .
Facebook owner Mark Zuckerberg has warned of Chinese competition .
He would be the biggest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. market .
The White House finally came up with Microsoft as a potential buyer .
But Microsoft has historically been unsuccessful in the social media business .
It also does other business with China and is reluctant to get involved in a move that could damage that business .
Despite Microsoft 's lack of interest President Trump personally pressed for a shotgun marriage .
The Democrats are supporting him in this .
But neither ByteDance nor Microsoft really want to make the deal .
ByteDance would prefer to move the TikTok @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could become totally independent from its Chinese owner ByteDance to continue operating overseas , according to a source who has been briefed on the discussions .
But the source said that despite reports that the video-sharing platform would be taken over by Microsoft , ByteDance founder Zhang Yiming and investors were reluctant to sell to the US company .
[ I ] f it is able to continue operating in the US , the board of ByteDance will agree to a complete spin-off for the overseas version of the app , which operates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The new entity would keep the TikTok name , but will have different management and will no longer answer to ByteDance .
“ Except for Zhang Yiming , almost all those in the room favour such a spin-off , ” the source said .
“ The mood is kind of : ‘ the founder will be out and the house will be ours ’ .
“ But even for Zhang himself , there ’ s really no other option because the app will be killed if you don ’ t let it go.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ except China where a ByteDance owned app similar to TikTok is run under the name Douyin .
A sale to Microsoft would only include the markets in the U.S. , Canada , New Zealand and Australia .
( Note that Britain is the only member of the 5-eyes club missing here . )
That Microsoft is not really wanting the deal can be gleaned for the convoluted statement it issued yesterday .
This is clearly unprecedented language in a public company 's communication : Following a conversation between Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prepared to continue discussions to explore a purchase of TikTok in the United States .
Microsoft fully appreciates the importance of addressing the President ’ s concerns .
It is committed to acquiring TikTok subject to a complete security review and providing proper economic benefits to the United States , including the United States Treasury .
Microsoft will move quickly to pursue discussions with TikTok ’ s parent company , ByteDance , in a matter of weeks , and in any event completing these discussions no later than September 15 , 2020 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to continuing dialogue with the United States Government , including with the President .
The discussions with ByteDance will build upon a notification made by Microsoft and ByteDance to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States ( CFIUS ) .
Microsoft may invite other American investors to participate on a minority basis in this purchase .
Microsoft appreciates the U.S. Government ’ s and President Trump ’ s personal involvement as it continues to develop strong security protections for the country .
This ass kissing of Trump is not what Microsoft @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was clearly pressed into publishing this .
Such a statement would usually include language about increasing shareholder value or better user experience .
This statement has none of that standard sweet talk .
The stock market seems to believe that a takeover of TikTok would be profitable for Microsoft : I have my doubts that Microsoft can successfully run a social network business .
This one would be restricted to just four countries and it would likely lose access to the continuing development of the app .
Where is the potential growth for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will China react if Microsoft takes part in the U.S. raid of ByteDance 's business ?
While China is only contributing some 2 % to Microsoft 's overall revenue the company 's biggest R & D center outside of the U.S. is in China .
It contributes to its global success : Microsoft 's X-Box game station as well as other hardware it sells is at least partially developed and produced in China .
Some of Microsoft 's Chinese engineers might have there own ideas on how China should retaliate to the attack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump administration sees that danger and it is pressingMicrosoft to get rid of all its relations with China : Leaving China would surely damage Microsoft 's long term business .
For a global company that country is a too big potential market to be left at the wayside .
But the real question about the mafia raid on ByteDance is who is destined to profit from it .
Today Trump said ( vid ) that if Microsoft closes the deal a substantial amount should be paid to the Treasury because his administration 'enabled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't consult a lawyer before making that wrongheaded statement .
But who are the `` other American investors '' who are invited `` to participate on a minority basis in this purchase '' .
Reuters had already reported that 'minority investor ' clause .
Is the wider Trump family involved in this ?
Why is that term so important for Trump that Microsoft has felt a need to repeat it in what is essentially a public terms letter addressed to Trump ?
Posted by b on August 3 , 2020 at 17:47 UTC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Alabama 's founding ( and chief ) editor .
This site 's purpose is to discuss politics , economics , philosophy and blogger Billmon 's Whiskey Bar writings .
Moon Of Alabama was opened as an independent , open forum for members of the Whiskey Bar community .
Bernhard ) '' b '' ) started and still runs the site .
Once in a while you will also find posts and art from regular commentators .
You can reach the current administrator of this site by emailing Bernhard at MoonofA @ aol.com @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License .

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.
DISPATCHES FROM MOON OF ALABAMA, BY "B"
This article is part of an ongoing series of dispatches from Moon of Alabama
T
he Trump administration is working to dispossess the Chinese company ByteDance by blackmailing it to sell its valuable TikTok business to a U.S. company for a bargain price. This to the benefit of yet unknown people.
False allegations over the security of TikTok user data were used to threaten the prohibition of the video app in its U.S. market. In the U.S. alone the app is used by more than 80 million people. It plays an important part in the youth culture and music business. Faced with a potential close down of its prime business in one of its most profitable markets ByteDance had no choice but to agree to negotiate about a sale.
ByteDance declined an offer by two of its U.S. based minority investors to buy the business for $50 billion as that price was far below its presumed value. The White House stepped in to find a new buyer with enough change to pay for a deal. As the largest social media companies - Facebook, Apple, Google and Twitter - are already under congressional investigations for their monopoly positions in U.S. markets none of them could be the potential buyer. Facebook has in fact just launched a rip-off of the TikTok product under the name Reels. It is trying to poach TikTok 'creators' for its own service. Facebook owner Mark Zuckerberg has warned of Chinese competition. He would be the biggest winner should TikTok be thrown out of the U.S. market.
The White House finally came up with Microsoft as a potential buyer. But Microsoft has historically been unsuccessful in the social media business. It also does other business with China and is reluctant to get involved in a move that could damage that business.
Despite Microsoft's lack of interest President Trump personally pressed for a shotgun marriage. The Democrats are supporting him in this. But neither ByteDance nor Microsoft really want to make the deal.
ByteDance would prefer to move the TikTok business into an independent company:
TikTok could become totally independent from its Chinese owner ByteDance to continue operating overseas, according to a source who has been briefed on the discussions. But the source said that despite reports that the video-sharing platform would be taken over by Microsoft, ByteDance founder Zhang Yiming and investors were reluctant to sell to the US company. [I]f it is able to continue operating in the US, the board of ByteDance will agree to a complete spin-off for the overseas version of the app, which operates under the name Douyin in China. The new entity would keep the TikTok name, but will have different management and will no longer answer to ByteDance. “Except for Zhang Yiming, almost all those in the room favour such a spin-off,” the source said. “The mood is kind of: ‘the founder will be out and the house will be ours’. “But even for Zhang himself, there’s really no other option because the app will be killed if you don’t let it go.”
The spin-off would cover all markets except China where a ByteDance owned app similar to TikTok is run under the name Douyin. A sale to Microsoft would only include the markets in the U.S., Canada, New Zealand and Australia. (Note that Britain is the only member of the 5-eyes club missing here.)
That Microsoft is not really wanting the deal can be gleaned for the convoluted statement it issued yesterday. This is clearly unprecedented language in a public company's communication:
Following a conversation between Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and President Donald J. Trump, Microsoft is prepared to continue discussions to explore a purchase of TikTok in the United States. Microsoft fully appreciates the importance of addressing the President’s concerns. It is committed to acquiring TikTok subject to a complete security review and providing proper economic benefits to the United States, including the United States Treasury. Microsoft will move quickly to pursue discussions with TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, in a matter of weeks, and in any event completing these discussions no later than September 15, 2020. During this process, Microsoft looks forward to continuing dialogue with the United States Government, including with the President. The discussions with ByteDance will build upon a notification made by Microsoft and ByteDance to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). Microsoft may invite other American investors to participate on a minority basis in this purchase. Microsoft appreciates the U.S. Government’s and President Trump’s personal involvement as it continues to develop strong security protections for the country.
This ass kissing of Trump is not what Microsoft is used to do. Satva Nadella was clearly pressed into publishing this. Such a statement would usually include language about increasing shareholder value or better user experience. This statement has none of that standard sweet talk.
The stock market seems to believe that a takeover of TikTok would be profitable for Microsoft:
I have my doubts that Microsoft can successfully run a social network business. This one would be restricted to just four countries and it would likely lose access to the continuing development of the app. Where is the potential growth for such a restricted application?
And how will China react if Microsoft takes part in the U.S. raid of ByteDance's business? While China is only contributing some 2% to Microsoft's overall revenue the company's biggest R&D center outside of the U.S. is in China. It contributes to its global success:
“[There has been an] explosion of innovation in China,” [Microsoft President Brad] Smith said. “One of the things that we at Microsoft have long appreciated is the enormous ingenuity of the engineering population of China.”
Microsoft's X-Box game station as well as other hardware it sells is at least partially developed and produced in China. Some of Microsoft's Chinese engineers might have there own ideas on how China should retaliate to the attack on a successful Chinese company. The Trump administration sees that danger and it is pressingMicrosoft to get rid of all its relations with China:
White House trade adviser Peter Navarro suggested on Monday that Microsoft could divest its holdings in China if it were to buy TikTok. “So the question is, is Microsoft going to be compromised?” Navarro said in an interview with CNN. “Maybe Microsoft could divest its Chinese holdings?”
Leaving China would surely damage Microsoft's long term business. For a global company that country is a too big potential market to be left at the wayside.
But the real question about the mafia raid on ByteDance is who is destined to profit from it.
Today Trump said (vid) that if Microsoft closes the deal a substantial amount should be paid to the Treasury because his administration 'enabled the deal'. He likely didn't consult a lawyer before making that wrongheaded statement.
But who are the "other American investors" who are invited "to participate on a minority basis in this purchase". Reuters had already reported that 'minority investor' clause. Is the wider Trump family involved in this?
Why is that term so important for Trump that Microsoft has felt a need to repeat it in what is essentially a public terms letter addressed to Trump?
Posted by b on August 3, 2020 at 17:47 UTC | Permalink
Comments Sampler
NOTE ^1000Careerist lackeys serving the elites control the American press. Ever pushing for war and inequality, covering up the oligarchy's crimes... They are in reality shameless disinformers. No wonder the world is in such terrible disarray.
About the author(s) "b" is Moon of Alabama's founding (and chief) editor. This site's purpose is to discuss politics, economics, philosophy and blogger Billmon's Whiskey Bar writings. Moon Of Alabama was opened as an independent, open forum for members of the Whiskey Bar community. Bernhard )"b") started and still runs the site. Once in a while you will also find posts and art from regular commentators. You can reach the current administrator of this site by emailing Bernhard at MoonofA@aol.com.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
Comment here or on our Facebook Group page.


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-08-09--New Iran envoy Elliott Abrams raises the risk that Israel will provoke Trump into conflict with Tehe

New Iran envoy Elliott Abrams raises the risk that Israel will provoke Trump into conflict with Teheran

But you won ’ t learn about this risk in today ’ s New York Times .
It appears that Timesreporters David Sanger and Michael Crowley are secretly moonlighting for Brian Hook , the outgoing U.S. Iran diplomat .
Their article only mentions Abrams once , and goes on to whitewash Hook ’ s career and give a distorted view of U.S. policy toward Iran .
Let ’ s turn to Eric Alterman for a recent , thorough look at Elliott Abrams and his criminal dishonesty about U.S.-sponsored crimes in Central America in the 1980s .
Alterman provides facts to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ cheerleader for murderous dictators , ” and adds that the new Iran envoy ’ s career was literally built on the defense of mass murder and genocide and his willingness to lie on behalf of those who carried it out and smear the reputations of anyone who sought to try and stop or expose it .
As a consequence of the Iran-Contra affair , in 1991 Abrams did plead guilty of lying to Congress , but President George H. W. Bush promptly pardoned him .
Some people haven ’ t forgotten : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during a Congressional hearing vivisecting Abrams about his crimes in Central America .
Let ’ s turn to the Mideast .
Abrams is a lifelong pro-Israel ideologue who has said that all Jews must “ stand apart ” from the country they live in except Israel .
As part of the George W. Bush administration , he enthusiastically supported the disastrous U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 .
You learn nothing about Abrams ’ s dark history from today ’ s New York Times report .
Instead , the article inexplicably dwells on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the paper an interview .
( The Washington Post report wryly noted that , “ Hook could not be reached for comment . )
The Times praises Hook as a “ smooth debater , ” and implies that he had been genuinely trying for diplomacy with Iran — instead of the truth , which is that the U.S. imposed crippling sanctions , and Israel ( and probably America as well ) have carried out a string of sabotage attacks inside Iran that are intended to provoke conflict .
Meanwhile , Trump is getting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pandemic rages across America .
Netanyahu is also in trouble , as mass demonstrations in Israel target him over Covid-19 and other failures .
Both men listen to their friend and campaign mega-donor , the pro-Israel gambling billionaire , Sheldon Adelson , who has called for “ an atomic weapon ” to be fired at Iran .
As the risk of war grows , you can bet that Elliott Abrams will not be a voice of reason .

The danger that Benjamin Netanyahu will provoke Donald Trump into attacking Iran is not over. In fact, the risk of conflict just increased — because the new U.S. special envoy for Iran is none other than Elliott Abrams, the defender of mass murder in the1980s in Central America who is also fanatically pro-Israel.
But you won’t learn about this risk in today’s New York Times. It appears that Timesreporters David Sanger and Michael Crowley are secretly moonlighting for Brian Hook, the outgoing U.S. Iran diplomat. Their article only mentions Abrams once, and goes on to whitewash Hook’s career and give a distorted view of U.S. policy toward Iran.
Let’s turn to Eric Alterman for a recent, thorough look at Elliott Abrams and his criminal dishonesty about U.S.-sponsored crimes in Central America in the 1980s. Alterman provides facts to substantiate his view that Abrams was a “cheerleader for murderous dictators,” and adds that the new Iran envoy’s
career was literally built on the defense of mass murder and genocide and his willingness to lie on behalf of those who carried it out and smear the reputations of anyone who sought to try and stop or expose it.
As a consequence of the Iran-Contra affair, in 1991 Abrams did plead guilty of lying to Congress, but President George H. W. Bush promptly pardoned him. Some people haven’t forgotten: here you can see Rep. Ilhan Omar during a Congressional hearing vivisecting Abrams about his crimes in Central America.
Let’s turn to the Mideast. Abrams is a lifelong pro-Israel ideologue who has said that all Jews must “stand apart” from the country they live in except Israel. As part of the George W. Bush administration, he enthusiastically supported the disastrous U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003.
You learn nothing about Abrams’s dark history from today’s New York Times report. Instead, the article inexplicably dwells on the outgoing Brian Hook, who granted the paper an interview. (The Washington Post report wryly noted that, “Hook could not be reached for comment.) The Times praises Hook as a “smooth debater,” and implies that he had been genuinely trying for diplomacy with Iran — instead of the truth, which is that the U.S. imposed crippling sanctions, and Israel (and probably America as well) have carried out a string of sabotage attacks inside Iran that are intended to provoke conflict.
(By contrast to the suck-piece in the Times, Daniel Drezner, in the Washington Post, last year wrote an article entitled “The political cowardice of Brian Hook,” showing how the now-ex Iran envoy held on to his position by kowtowing to Trump hacks.)


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-08-09--Trump’s quarrel with mega-donor Sheldon Adelson could be good news for Mideast peace

Earlier in the week , Mr. Trump had a tense phone call with the casino magnate Sheldon G. Adelson , whom the president upbraided for not donating more to support his re-election , according to a person familiar with the call .
Mr. Adelson and his wife donated $ 10 million to a super PAC supporting Mr. Trump in 2018 , and have each written checks for nearly $ 600,000 during this cycle .
The Times drew no conclusions from this intriguing fact .
But anyone who follows the Mideast recognizes that a Trump-Adelson rupture could have two positive consequences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be less likely to support Benjamin Netanyahu ’ s hope to illegally annex up to 30 percent of West Bank Palestine .
* Trump could also be less likely to let Israel sucker him into starting a conflict with Iran .
This mildly optimistic scenario is based partly on a revelation in the memoir of John Bolton , who served as Trump ’ s national security adviser before turning against him .
Bolton says that the U.S. was all set to launch air strikes against Iran in June 2019 , but Trump called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , concerned that it might kill 150 Iranians .
Bolton ( who Trump appointed apparently to please Adelson ) was disgusted , but the episode may show that the president has to be prodded into using violence .
The brief Times mention of the Trump-Adelson disagreement raises an interesting question : why didn ’ t the paper consult Mideast experts and draw some conclusions about the rupture ’ s possible impact on U.S. policy ?
Adelson ’ s warmongering pro-Israel views are no secret ; he has even called for “ an atomic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If a mega-donor connected to say , Big Pharma , broke with Trump , the Timeswould surely connect the dots .
But somehow the Israel factor goes unreported .

T
Earlier in the week, Mr. Trump had a tense phone call with the casino magnate Sheldon G. Adelson, whom the president upbraided for not donating more to support his re-election, according to a person familiar with the call. Mr. Adelson and his wife donated $10 million to a super PAC supporting Mr. Trump in 2018, and have each written checks for nearly $600,000 during this cycle .
he New York Times today buried some news that could turn out to be vital to peace in the Middle East over the next few months. Toward the end of a report on Trump’s bizarre press conference/campaign rally at his private club in New Jersey last night, the paper revealed that he is quarreling with Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire pro-Israel mega-donor:
The Times drew no conclusions from this intriguing fact. But anyone who follows the Mideast recognizes that a Trump-Adelson rupture could have two positive consequences right away:
* Trump could now be less likely to support Benjamin Netanyahu’s hope to illegally annex up to 30 percent of West Bank Palestine.
* Trump could also be less likely to let Israel sucker him into starting a conflict with Iran.
This mildly optimistic scenario is based partly on a revelation in the memoir of John Bolton, who served as Trump’s national security adviser before turning against him. Bolton says that the U.S. was all set to launch air strikes against Iran in June 2019, but Trump called off the attack at the last minute, concerned that it might kill 150 Iranians. Bolton (who Trump appointed apparently to please Adelson) was disgusted, but the episode may show that the president has to be prodded into using violence.
The brief Times mention of the Trump-Adelson disagreement raises an interesting question: why didn’t the paper consult Mideast experts and draw some conclusions about the rupture’s possible impact on U.S. policy? Adelson’s warmongering pro-Israel views are no secret; he has even called for “an atomic weapon” to be fired at Iran. If a mega-donor connected to say, Big Pharma, broke with Trump, the Timeswould surely connect the dots. But somehow the Israel factor goes unreported.
(P.S. Politico is also reporting about the Trump-Adelson disagreement — and also making no mention of its potential impact on Israel, Iran and Mideast peace.) Addendum AUGUST 7, 2020 President Trump News Conference from Bedminster, New Jersey


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-08-09--Matthew Ehret : What’s Happening In Beirut & The Middle East.

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible .
Share with kin , friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise .
Wherein geopolitical analyst Matthew Ehret takes aim at the recent Beirut blast , as horrific as it remains mysterious in origin .
In the absence of hard evidence , conjectures and conspiracies are flying about , but , at least for the time being , a reasoned response is the best path out of this calamity .
Soon , we hope , we may know the exact cause or author ( s ) of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's Article Describing current state of affairs it the Middle East : https : //www.strategic-culture.org/new ... Matthew J.L .
Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review and founder of the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation .
His works are regularly featured on Strategic Culture , the Duran , Zero Hedge , Fort Russ , Lew Rockwell , Global Research , Dissident Voice , Off-Guardian and Greanville Post .
He is the author of the Untold History of Canada book series and be reached at matt.ehret @ tutamail.com Read it in your language @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff we publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for our website , which will get you an email notification for everything we publish .
THIS WORK IS LICENSED UNDER A Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.
SOCIAL CHAOS IN OUR TIME Wherein geopolitical analyst Matthew Ehret takes aim at the recent Beirut blast, as horrific as it remains mysterious in origin. In the absence of hard evidence, conjectures and conspiracies are flying about, but, at least for the time being, a reasoned response is the best path out of this calamity. Soon, we hope, we may know the exact cause or author(s) of this tragedy. ROGUE NEWS Matthew's Website: https://risingtidefoundation.net/ Mathew's Article Describing current state of affairs it the Middle East: https://www.strategic-culture.org/new... Matthew J.L. Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review and founder of the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation. His works are regularly featured on Strategic Culture, the Duran, Zero Hedge, Fort Russ, Lew Rockwell, Global Research, Dissident Voice, Off-Guardian and Greanville Post. He is the author of the Untold History of Canada book series and be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com
Read it in your language • Lealo en su idioma • Lisez-le dans votre langue • Lies es in Deiner Sprache • Прочитайте это на вашем языке • 用你的语言阅读
[google-translator]
The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff we publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for our website, which will get you an email notification for everything we publish.
THIS WORK IS LICENSED UNDER A Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License


thegreanvillepostbiasrating--2020-08-10--The Evilness of America’s Ruling Class

The Evilness of America’s Ruling Class

Another important dispatch from The Greanville Post .
Be sure to share it widely .
This article is part of an ongoing series of dispatches by historian Eric Zuesse What is the result of billionaires-rule ?
And this fact shows itself most starkly in international relations , America ’ s imperialism , from which the whole world suffers .
That ’ s why the U.S. Government is profoundly evil : destroying Iraq in 2003- , destroying Libya in 2011- , destroying Syria in 2012- , etc.
, and trying so hard to destroy Venezuela , Iran , Russia , China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t yet destroyed and is still trying to conquer via sanctions , coups , or invasions .
It ’ s not the American people who are evil ; it is all of America ’ s billionaires — not a one of whom funds any anti-imperialist candidate .
They ALL want conquest , because they all are supremacists .
Here ’ s just one example : Elon Musk .
by the richest , a bigotry which serves the interests of the wealthiest .
And , as usual , “ We will coup whoever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ After some negative public reactions to that , he added , “ Also , we get our lithium from Australia.
” Then , on July 25th , “ Carlos Reymon G ” replied “ Dude you get Lithium from Ganfeng which gets their Lithium from Bolivia ; a quick google search will tell you that.
” Immediately prior to those exchanges , Musk had tried to signal his virtuousness by A 29 November 2019 article presented the 10 November 2019 coup there as having been internally based upon targeting that country ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the country ’ s 30 % white European-derived aristocracy and upper-middle class , so that this was a targetingthe richest , a bigotry which serves the interests of the wealthiest .
And , as usual , was backing that bigotry .
Furthermore , on 24 July 2020 , Tesla corporation ’ s founder , Elon Musk , back in response to a tweet from an “ Armani ” which criticized “ the U.S. government organizing a coup against Evo Morales in Bolivia so you could obtain the lithium there.
” Musk repliedAfter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he added , “ Also , we get our lithium from Australia.
” Then , on July 25th , “ Carlos Reymon G ” replied “ Dude you get Lithium from Ganfeng which gets their Lithium from Bolivia ; a quick google search will tell you that.
” Immediately prior to those exchanges , Musk had tried to signal his virtuousness by , on the morning of July 24th , “ As a reminder , I ’ m in *favor* of universal basic income.
” So , though he thinks it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he doesn ’ t want to treat his own nation ’ s poor so psychopathically .
His bigotry against the masses in Bolivia doesn ’ t extend to the masses in his own country , he was saying .
At , many of the commenters were in denial , and just assumed that Musk had been joking — “ In order to understand the joke you have to understand the coup thing ( and his involvement ) is a conspiracy theory in socialist circles without any basis in reality.
” — or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to believe how evil and deceitful , and outright bigoted ( basically supremacist ) , people have to be in order to become and remain a billionaire .
The idea that wealth reflects virtue — maybe even God ’ s blessing — is heavily promoted , by billionaires .
For them , it ’ s a self- ‘ justifying ’ belief .
The myth of the kindly ‘ philanthropic ’ billionaire ( supposedly not motivated by the tax-writeoffs and buildings that will be named in their honor for the ‘ donation ’ ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America and many other countries — countries that are largely controlled by the U.S. regime ( its billionaires ) .
Musk himself was born in 1971 and lived his entire formative years in apartheid South Africa , leaving for Canada in 1988 , so that he lived all of his first 17 years under the racist apartheid White dictatorship .
He was raised in an exceptionally wealthy family , and went to Canada for college , specifically so that he would be able more easily to be received into America ’ s Wharton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his entire family were obsessed with money and sex , surrounded by intense racism and with being on the , and they were satisfied to live as extremely wealthy and successful Whites under an apartheid White-supremacist Government , never condemning it , either before or after the end of apartheid in the 1990s .
So , it ’ s perhaps natural for Musk today to view the 70 % native-indian population of Bolivia as being just fine to exploit and crush — even to rob them — much like Blacks had been robbed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and where he was growing up .
On 20 July 2020 , Forbes headlined “ Elon Musk Is Now The Fifth Richest Person In The World ” and reported that “ As of Monday afternoon , Musk ’ s net worth surpassed $ 74 billion , meaning he is now the fifth-richest person on the planet.
” Bolivia ’ s entire Gross National Product during 2019 was $ 40.58 billion .
That ’ s for 11.4 million people — $ 3,559 per person .
How much of an opportunity will each of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ $ 74 billion ( assuming they ’ d be psychopathic enough , and gifted enough , to ‘ earn ’ it ) ?
For a person to become a billionaire , or stay one , psychopathy is the first requirement .
It ’ s that way everywhere , unless the Government is very strict in prohibiting that .
A libertarian ( otherwise called “ neo-liberal ” ) government offers maximum freedom for the richest , but grinding servitude for everyone at the bottom , where there are typically found many decent , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s an upside-down world , but that ’ s naturally the way things are .
What ’ s natural isn ’ t necessarily good .
Billionaires want the public to believe otherwise , but they know themselves to be lying when they say that what ’ s good is natural .
A good society never happens naturally , and they know this , but they don ’ t want the public to know it , and they make sure that the majority of the public won ’ t know it .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ will likely go to prison for decades , a billionaire who crushes millions and kills tens or hundreds of thousands will have no accountability , at all .
And most , even of Bolivia ’ s 70 % native-indian population , won ’ t know who robbed and crushed them , and how it was done to them .
They will know only the result — nothing else .
The result is something that they ’ ll know , only too well .
A progressive wants equal opportunity for all , and equal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nature is exactly the opposite : it is libertarian ( total opportunity , and no liability ) for the richest , but stifling serfdom for everybody else .
Libertarians call the state of nature simply “ libertarianism , ” but it ’ s actually the most liberty for the fewest .
And today ’ s America exemplifies that , in an extreme way .
The suffering , from it , extends globally .
And the source of this suffering is hidden by billionaires , globally , which is the reason why the regime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Syria 2012- , Venezuela , Iran , Russia , China , etc.
, and that is also profoundly bigoted against Blacks and some other groups domestically , is still accepted in some countries , and not yet sanctioned worldwide , and why its brands are not even being boycotted , anywhere .
This isn ’ t to say that America ’ s billionaires are abnormal , but only that they are the most powerful , because they are the billionaires who control the imperial regime .
America ’ s allies such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( and new reports of their corruption all the time ) , but they would not be the threats that they are if they weren ’ t vassals of the imperial regime .
The problem isn ’ t only their evilness ; it ’ s the power that they hold .
That ’ s why the focus right now needs to be on the U.S. regime , and on the billionaires who control it .
That ’ s where the main threat to the world is , at the center .
Voters in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to vote for it ; they don ’ t revolt against it ; so , if the counterforce won ’ t come from the outside , then it won ’ t come at all .
And , if counterforce won ’ t come at all , then what hope is there , really ?
Individuals in foreign countries can vote against it , and boycott it .
That ’ s all .

Another important dispatch from The Greanville Post. Be sure to share it widely.
This article is part of an ongoing series of dispatches by historian Eric Zuesse
What is the result of billionaires-rule?
only type of crime a billionaire can be successfully prosecuted for perpetrating in America — crimes against other billionaires). The people who control the people who write and enforce the laws don’t need to worry about prison. Almost all of America’s prisoners are, in fact, poor people, not even middle-class — and virtually none are upper-class. They’re born poor, live poor, and die poor. America has a higher percentage of its people in prison than any other nation on Earth , and none of America’s prisoners are billionaires nor spouse or child of any, except for the very few organized criminals who were cheating and stealing from other billionaires (and, since billionaires rule America, that’s thetype of crime a billionaire can be successfully prosecuted for perpetrating in America — crimes against). The people who control the people who write and enforce the laws don’t need to worry about prison. Almost all of America’s prisoners are, in fact, poor people, not even middle-class — and virtually none are upper-class. They’re born poor, live poor, and die poor.
not by representing its voters. Behind the scenes, even Donald Trump, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and George W. Bush, have all had their careers funded by America’s billionaires , and that’s why these politicians received their respective Party’s nominations. Without the billionaires’ support, they’d be nothing, just losing politicians. You get the nomination by representing your Party’s billionaires,by representing its voters. Behind the scenes, even America’s racial caste system is enforced on behalf of both Parties’ billionaires, because supremacism is what they all share, regardless of their rhetoric to the contrary, and there is a groupist element to this supremacism. (Every aristocracy is like that — very groupist .)
And this fact shows itself most starkly in international relations, America’s imperialism, from which the whole world suffers.
That’s why the U.S. Government is profoundly evil: destroying Iraq in 2003-, destroying Libya in 2011-, destroying Syria in 2012-, etc., and trying so hard to destroy Venezuela, Iran, Russia, China, and any other country it hasn’t yet destroyed and is still trying to conquer via sanctions, coups, or invasions.
It’s not the American people who are evil; it is all of America’s billionaires — not a one of whom funds any anti-imperialist candidate. They ALL want conquest, because they all are supremacists.
Here’s just one example: Elon Musk.
by the richest, a bigotry which serves the interests of the wealthiest. And, as usual, “We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it.” After some negative public reactions to that, he added, “Also, we get our lithium from Australia.” Then, on July 25th, “Carlos Reymon G” replied “Dude you get Lithium from Ganfeng which gets their Lithium from Bolivia; a quick google search will tell you that.” Immediately prior to those exchanges, Musk had tried to signal his virtuousness by A 29 November 2019 article “Bolivia: Post-Coup Update” presented the 10 November 2019 coup there as having been internally based upon targeting that country’s native indian 70% as being inferior to the country’s 30% white European-derived aristocracy and upper-middle class, so that this was a targetingthe richest, a bigotry which serves the interests of the wealthiest. And, as usual, the U.S. regime was backing that bigotry. Furthermore, on 24 July 2020, Tesla corporation’s founder, Elon Musk, tweeted back in response to a tweet from an “Armani” which criticized “the U.S. government organizing a coup against Evo Morales in Bolivia so you could obtain the lithium there.” Musk repliedAfter some negative public reactions to that, he added, “Also, we get our lithium from Australia.” Then, on July 25th, “Carlos Reymon G” replied “Dude you get Lithium from Ganfeng which gets their Lithium from Bolivia; a quick google search will tell you that.” Immediately prior to those exchanges, Musk had tried to signal his virtuousness by tweeting , on the morning of July 24th, “As a reminder, I’m in *favor* of universal basic income.” So, though he thinks it’s fine to rob the poor in Bolivia, he doesn’t want to treat his own nation’s poor so psychopathically. His bigotry against the masses in Bolivia doesn’t extend to the masses in his own country, he was saying. At Reddit , many of the commenters were in denial, and just assumed that Musk had been joking — “In order to understand the joke you have to understand the coup thing ( and his involvement ) is a conspiracy theory in socialist circles without any basis in reality.” — or etc. Many ordinary people simply refuse to believe how evil and deceitful, and outright bigoted (basically supremacist), people have to be in order to become and remain a billionaire. The idea that wealth reflects virtue — maybe even God’s blessing — is heavily promoted, by billionaires. For them, it’s a self-‘justifying’ belief. The myth of the kindly ‘philanthropic’ billionaire (supposedly not motivated by the tax-writeoffs and buildings that will be named in their honor for the ‘donation’) is thus intrinsic to the culture in America and many other countries — countries that are largely controlled by the U.S. regime (its billionaires).
Musk himself was born in 1971 and lived his entire formative years in apartheid South Africa, leaving for Canada in 1988, so that he lived all of his first 17 years under the racist apartheid White dictatorship. He was raised in an exceptionally wealthy family, and went to Canada for college, specifically so that he would be able more easily to be received into America’s Wharton School as a Canadian. He and his entire family were obsessed with money and sex, surrounded by intense racism and with being on the “gifted” (i.e., lucky) end of that supremacism , and they were satisfied to live as extremely wealthy and successful Whites under an apartheid White-supremacist Government, never condemning it, either before or after the end of apartheid in the 1990s. So, it’s perhaps natural for Musk today to view the 70% native-indian population of Bolivia as being just fine to exploit and crush — even to rob them — much like Blacks had been robbed by the racist bigoted system, when and where he was growing up.
negate any social science, and to advocate instead for the “state of nature,” which is “red in tooth and claw,” and to apply that standard to human society. It is to take what is the systemic norm (chaos), as being instead what should be the systemic norm; it is to reject any social science, at all. Victory to the psychopaths is bad, not good. That actual societal chaos is what billionaires push for, even when their rhetoric is the exact opposite. Their rhetoric is the opposite because, in order to win, they need to deceive the public; they need to do this in order to conquer the public, as any supremacist wants to do. Deceit is their primary weapon. To view people like Musk (left) as models to emulate, is common, but evil — systemically evil, because it sets an abhorrent standard, as being something that should instead be perpetuated and copied. There is no way in which the social sciences should shun moral evaluations, but they need to be empirically justifiable, which is not the way nature itself functions — nature is unplanned (nothing that is justifiable or unjustifiable). This type of planning can be done only by deviating from the natural dominance of psychopathy (“It’s I versus everybody else”) in social matters. To deny the unnaturalness of good, and to set the natural psychopathy as being instead something to emulate, is the opposite of science. It is not only to lie; it is to avoid the application of science to the planning of society. It is toany social science, and to advocate instead for the “state of nature,” which is “red in tooth and claw,” and to apply that standard to human society. It is to take what is the systemic norm (chaos), as being instead what should be the systemic norm; it is to reject any social science, at all. Victory to the psychopaths is bad, not good. That actual societal chaos is what billionaires push for, even when their rhetoric is the exact opposite. Their rhetoric is the opposite because, in order to win, they need to deceive the public; they need to do this in order to conquer the public, as any supremacist wants to do. Deceit is their primary weapon.
On 20 July 2020, Forbes headlined “Elon Musk Is Now The Fifth Richest Person In The World” and reported that “As of Monday afternoon, Musk’s net worth surpassed $74 billion, meaning he is now the fifth-richest person on the planet.” Bolivia’s entire Gross National Product during 2019 was $40.58 billion. That’s for 11.4 million people — $3,559 per person. How much of an opportunity will each of those 11.4 million people have to ‘earn’ $74 billion (assuming they’d be psychopathic enough, and gifted enough, to ‘earn’ it)?
For a person to become a billionaire, or stay one, psychopathy is the first requirement . It’s that way everywhere, unless the Government is very strict in prohibiting that. A libertarian (otherwise called “neo-liberal”) government offers maximum freedom for the richest, but grinding servitude for everyone at the bottom, where there are typically found many decent, and even many heroic, individuals. It’s an upside-down world, but that’s naturally the way things are. What’s natural isn’t necessarily good. Billionaires want the public to believe otherwise, but they know themselves to be lying when they say that what’s good is natural. A good society never happens naturally, and they know this, but they don’t want the public to know it, and they make sure that the majority of the public won’t know it.
While a pauper who kills one person will likely go to prison for decades, a billionaire who crushes millions and kills tens or hundreds of thousands will have no accountability, at all. And most, even of Bolivia’s 70% native-indian population, won’t know who robbed and crushed them, and how it was done to them. They will know only the result — nothing else. The result is something that they’ll know, only too well.
A progressive wants equal opportunity for all, and equal liability to all. The state of nature is exactly the opposite: it is libertarian (total opportunity, and no liability) for the richest, but stifling serfdom for everybody else. Libertarians call the state of nature simply “libertarianism,” but it’s actually the most liberty for the fewest. And today’s America exemplifies that, in an extreme way. The suffering, from it, extends globally.
And the source of this suffering is hidden by billionaires, globally, which is the reason why the regime that perpetrated Iraq 2003-, Libya 2011-, Syria 2012-, Venezuela, Iran, Russia, China, etc., and that is also profoundly bigoted against Blacks and some other groups domestically, is still accepted in some countries, and not yet sanctioned worldwide, and why its brands are not even being boycotted, anywhere.