mintpressnews--2020-11-04--Angelina Jolie’s MI6 Interview Shows Just How Connected Hollywood Is To the Deep State

With election fever still gripping the U.S. , talk of rigging or interference in the democratic process is reaching new levels , high enough that even Hollywood legend Angelina Jolie is talking about it .
In an extraordinary interview in Time magazine , the star of “ Wanted , Maleficent , and Lara Croft : Tomb Raider , ” sat down with the former head of the UK ’ s MI6 spy network , Sir Alex Younger , to ask how worrying the threat from Russia or China really is .
“ Russia feels threatened by the quality of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ environment , the quality of our democratic institutions .
It sets out to denigrate them , and it uses intelligence services to that end .
It is a serious problem , and we should organize to prevent it , ” the British spook told the actress .
Younger also went on to discuss the rise of China , and how the West must act to challenge the supposed threat Beijing poses .
“ We are going to have two sharply different value systems in operation on the same planet for the foreseeable future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We need to retain the capacity to defend ourselves , ” he told Jolie .
Never challenging him , Jolie even asked the head of perhaps the world ’ s most notorious spying agency how we can protect ourselves from fake information .
To some , the pairing of a Hollywood star and a veteran spymaster might seem strange .
But , in reality , the silver screen and the national security state have always been intimately intertwined .
And as much as Jolie presents herself as a leading humanitarian , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the UN Commission for Refugees , she has spent an inordinate amount of her free time rubbing shoulders with some of the world ’ s worst human rights abuses .
At World Refugee Day in 2005 , Jolie shared a stage with then-U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice .
Rice was a key player in the Bush administration , responsible for the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions , two of the world ’ s worst humanitarian and refugee crises that continue to plague the planet to this day .
Jolie herself has slowly become @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security apparatus , joining the influential and well-endowed Council on Foreign Relations think tank in 2007 , and penning a joint op-ed in The New York Times with John McCain two years ago calling for U.S. intervention in Syria and Myanmar .
“ Around the world , there is profound concern that America is giving up the mantle of global leadership , ” they questionably asserted , decrying America ’ s “ steady retreat over the past decade ” that has , “ dangerously eroded the rule of law , ” and condemned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Syria that could have “ deterred mass atrocities , ” and reduced the refugee crisis .
Jolie ’ s collaboration with high-level government officials is not limited to her personal life , however .
The 45-year-old Californian has also worked closely , and openly , with CIA officials as part of her movies .
A case in point is the 2010 blockbuster Salt , where Jolie plays a CIA agent accused of being a Russian spy .
The movie was released at the same time as the real-life Anna Chapman scandal , where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her country inside the U.S. , and marked the beginning of hardening American relations with Moscow , ending up at the point where some have declared the beginning of a new Cold War .
“ Salt was the first big cultural product reflecting this geopolitical change , for most of the 2000s Hollywood had no interest in evil Russians , ” Tom Secker , an investigative journalist with SpyCulture.com told MintPress .
“ If you watch the film the Russian politicians are clearly based on Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev.
” “ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the CIA , ” said Jolie of her experiences preparing for her role .
She appeared to have nothing but admiration for the organization ; “ One after the other , they are just these lovely , sweet women that you can‟t imagine being put in a dangerous situation , but they really are , ” she added .
Salt even hired a former CIA officer to be an on-set technical advisor .
A CIA document Secker shared with MintPress highlights the extent of CIA involvement in Hollywood and their reasons for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ensure an accurate portrayal of the men and women of the CIA , ” it reads .
“ For years the Agency has worked with creative artists from across the entertainment industry .
[ The CIA Office of Public Affairs ] interacts with directors , producers , screenwriters , authors , documentarians , actors and others to help debunk myths and provide authenticity , and of course to protect Agency equities , ” it adds .
But perhaps the most important reason stated is , “ to help prevent inappropriate negative depictions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media .
The level of state involvement in Salt is far from abnormal .
In fact , Alford and Secker ’ s book “ National Security Cinema ” details how , since 2005 , documents they obtained showed that the Department of Defense alone had closely collaborated in the production of over 1,000 movies or TV shows .
This includes many of the largest film franchises , such as “ Iron Man , ” “ Transformers , ” “ James Bond , ” and “ Mission : Impossible , ” and hit TV @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ Grey ’ s Anatomy , ” “ Master Chef ” and “ The Price is Right.
” In general , the military or the CIA will offer free services to productions , such as the use of prohibitively expensive military equipment , or technical direction , in exchange for editorial control over scripts .
This allows the agencies to make sure the power , prestige , and integrity of these organizations are not challenged .
Sometimes entire movies are radically rewritten .
“ The Department of Defense actually apologized in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hulk ” ( 2003 ) , since the changes they required were so extensive , ” Dr. Matthew Alford of the University of Bath told MintPress .
Thus , the large majority of big-budget productions featuring military or intelligence services have been greenlighted by the national security state , who have negotiated for control over the message in order to better propagandize both Americans and the global public .
However , serious antiwar content rarely makes it to network TV or Hollywood drawing boards , so wholescale interference is usually unnecessary .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ General Counsel of the CIA , John Rizzo , wrote that his organization “ has long had a special relationship with the entertainment industry , devoting considerable attention to fostering relationships with Hollywood movers and shakers—studio executives , producers , directors , big-name actors.
” Many of America ’ s most familiar faces have visited the organization ’ s headquarters in Langley , VA , including Will Smith , Robert De Niro , Mike Myers , Bryan Cranston , and Tom Cruise .
In recent years , collaboration has become even more overt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out during the Oscars how proud it is to work so closely with Hollywood to further its own image .
Meanwhile , the latest series of the hit spy show “ Jack Ryan , ” for instance , has the eponymous CIA hero travel to Venezuela to help overthrow tyrannical dictator Nicolas Reyes ( a clear allusion to current president Nicolas Maduro ) .
John Krasinski , who plays Ryan , said that he worked closely with the Agency in order to make the show more realistic .
Krasinski also described the CIA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re always trying to do the right thing , ” he said of them , claiming they “ care about the country in a bigger , more idealistic way.
” Last month , a real CIA agent , Matthew John Heath , was arrested outside Venezuela ’ s largest oil refinery carrying explosives , a grenade launcher , a submachine gun , and stacks of U.S. dollars .
“ Probably Hollywood is full of CIA agents and we just don ’ t know it .
And I wouldn ’ t be surprised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extremely common , ” said “ Batman ” star Ben Affleck in 2012 , before going to describe himself , perhaps jokingly , as a CIA agent himself .
The effect of years of propaganda has been to improve the standing of the deep state and make the American public more conducive to supporting the tactics of the CIA and the military .
One academic study found that showing torture scenes from the hit spy series “ 24 ” to liberal college students made them far more likely to support the use of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state .
Democrat-aligned voters ’ opinion of the FBI has been steadily rising over the last decade , to the point that 77 % hold a favorable view of the institution ( and almost two-thirds of the country supports the CIA ) .
Thus , while the entertainment industry might be liberal in that it largely opposes Trump and donates to the Democratic Party , it works closely to support and uphold the national security state , promotes ultra-patriotism and American aggression throughout the world .
While Jolie might present herself as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the very institutions responsible for destroying those rights around the globe undermines this assertion .
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News .
After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books : Bad News From Venezuela : Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age : Still Manufacturing Consent .
He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

With election fever still gripping the U.S., talk of rigging or interference in the democratic process is reaching new levels, high enough that even Hollywood legend Angelina Jolie is talking about it. In an extraordinary interview in Time magazine, the star of “Wanted, Maleficent, and Lara Croft: Tomb Raider,” sat down with the former head of the UK’s MI6 spy network, Sir Alex Younger, to ask how worrying the threat from Russia or China really is.
“Russia feels threatened by the quality of our alliances and, even in the current environment, the quality of our democratic institutions. It sets out to denigrate them, and it uses intelligence services to that end. It is a serious problem, and we should organize to prevent it,” the British spook told the actress.
Younger also went on to discuss the rise of China, and how the West must act to challenge the supposed threat Beijing poses. “We are going to have two sharply different value systems in operation on the same planet for the foreseeable future. We mustn’t be naïve. We need to retain the capacity to defend ourselves,” he told Jolie.
Never challenging him, Jolie even asked the head of perhaps the world’s most notorious spying agency how we can protect ourselves from fake information.
To some, the pairing of a Hollywood star and a veteran spymaster might seem strange. But, in reality, the silver screen and the national security state have always been intimately intertwined. And as much as Jolie presents herself as a leading humanitarian, even being appointed as a Special Envoy for the UN Commission for Refugees, she has spent an inordinate amount of her free time rubbing shoulders with some of the world’s worst human rights abuses.
At World Refugee Day in 2005, Jolie shared a stage with then-U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Rice was a key player in the Bush administration, responsible for the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions, two of the world’s worst humanitarian and refugee crises that continue to plague the planet to this day.
Jolie herself has slowly become a leading member of the U.S. national security apparatus, joining the influential and well-endowed Council on Foreign Relations think tank in 2007, and penning a joint op-ed in The New York Times with John McCain two years ago calling for U.S. intervention in Syria and Myanmar. “Around the world, there is profound concern that America is giving up the mantle of global leadership,” they questionably asserted, decrying America’s “steady retreat over the past decade” that has, “dangerously eroded the rule of law,” and condemned the Trump administration’s inaction in Syria that could have “deterred mass atrocities,” and reduced the refugee crisis.
Salt
Jolie’s collaboration with high-level government officials is not limited to her personal life, however. The 45-year-old Californian has also worked closely, and openly, with CIA officials as part of her movies. A case in point is the 2010 blockbuster Salt, where Jolie plays a CIA agent accused of being a Russian spy. The movie was released at the same time as the real-life Anna Chapman scandal, where the Russian national was caught spying for her country inside the U.S., and marked the beginning of hardening American relations with Moscow, ending up at the point where some have declared the beginning of a new Cold War.
“Salt was the first big cultural product reflecting this geopolitical change, for most of the 2000s Hollywood had no interest in evil Russians,” Tom Secker, an investigative journalist with SpyCulture.com told MintPress. “If you watch the film the Russian politicians are clearly based on Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev.”
“We talked to a lot of the women in the CIA,” said Jolie of her experiences preparing for her role. She appeared to have nothing but admiration for the organization; “One after the other, they are just these lovely, sweet women that you can‟t imagine being put in a dangerous situation, but they really are,” she added. Salt even hired a former CIA officer to be an on-set technical advisor.
A CIA document Secker shared with MintPress highlights the extent of CIA involvement in Hollywood and their reasons for doing so. “In an effort to ensure an accurate portrayal of the men and women of the CIA,” it reads. “For years the Agency has worked with creative artists from across the entertainment industry. [The CIA Office of Public Affairs] interacts with directors, producers, screenwriters, authors, documentarians, actors and others to help debunk myths and provide authenticity, and of course to protect Agency equities,” it adds. But perhaps the most important reason stated is, “to help prevent inappropriate negative depictions of the Agency,” in mass media.
Propaganda on an enormous scale
The level of state involvement in Salt is far from abnormal. In fact, Alford and Secker’s book “National Security Cinema” details how, since 2005, documents they obtained showed that the Department of Defense alone had closely collaborated in the production of over 1,000 movies or TV shows. This includes many of the largest film franchises, such as “Iron Man,” “Transformers,” “James Bond,” and “Mission: Impossible,” and hit TV shows like “The Biggest Loser,” “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Master Chef” and “The Price is Right.”
In general, the military or the CIA will offer free services to productions, such as the use of prohibitively expensive military equipment, or technical direction, in exchange for editorial control over scripts. This allows the agencies to make sure the power, prestige, and integrity of these organizations are not challenged. Sometimes entire movies are radically rewritten.
“The Department of Defense actually apologized in their covering letter to the producers of “Hulk” (2003), since the changes they required were so extensive,” Dr. Matthew Alford of the University of Bath told MintPress.
But really the disturbing thing here is the pattern and the scale…What I suggest is that we focus on the deliberate, major, secretive pressures that rewrite scripts — and we find they’re all on the side of the national security state. Systematically scrubbed from the screen is an unsavoury century of military history including war crimes, illegal arms sales, racism and sexual assault, torture, coups, assassinations, and weapons of mass destruction. It amounts to the airbrushing of an entire mediated culture.”
Thus, the large majority of big-budget productions featuring military or intelligence services have been greenlighted by the national security state, who have negotiated for control over the message in order to better propagandize both Americans and the global public. However, serious antiwar content rarely makes it to network TV or Hollywood drawing boards, so wholescale interference is usually unnecessary.
In 2014, former Deputy Counsel or Acting General Counsel of the CIA, John Rizzo, wrote that his organization “has long had a special relationship with the entertainment industry, devoting considerable attention to fostering relationships with Hollywood movers and shakers—studio executives, producers, directors, big-name actors.” Many of America’s most familiar faces have visited the organization’s headquarters in Langley, VA, including Will Smith, Robert De Niro, Mike Myers, Bryan Cranston, and Tom Cruise.
In recent years, collaboration has become even more overt. The Department of Defense even tweeted out during the Oscars how proud it is to work so closely with Hollywood to further its own image.
https://twitter.com/deptofdefense/status/970461390283587585?lang=en
Meanwhile, the latest series of the hit spy show “Jack Ryan,” for instance, has the eponymous CIA hero travel to Venezuela to help overthrow tyrannical dictator Nicolas Reyes (a clear allusion to current president Nicolas Maduro). John Krasinski, who plays Ryan, said that he worked closely with the Agency in order to make the show more realistic. Krasinski also described the CIA as amazingly “apolitical.” “They’re always trying to do the right thing,” he said of them, claiming they “care about the country in a bigger, more idealistic way.”
Last month, a real CIA agent, Matthew John Heath, was arrested outside Venezuela’s largest oil refinery carrying explosives, a grenade launcher, a submachine gun, and stacks of U.S. dollars.
“Probably Hollywood is full of CIA agents and we just don’t know it. And I wouldn’t be surprised at all to discover that this was extremely common,” said “Batman” star Ben Affleck in 2012, before going to describe himself, perhaps jokingly, as a CIA agent himself.
Propaganda works
The effect of years of propaganda has been to improve the standing of the deep state and make the American public more conducive to supporting the tactics of the CIA and the military. One academic study found that showing torture scenes from the hit spy series “24” to liberal college students made them far more likely to support the use of it against anyone deemed an enemy of the state.
Democrat-aligned voters’ opinion of the FBI has been steadily rising over the last decade, to the point that 77% hold a favorable view of the institution (and almost two-thirds of the country supports the CIA).
Thus, while the entertainment industry might be liberal in that it largely opposes Trump and donates to the Democratic Party, it works closely to support and uphold the national security state, promotes ultra-patriotism and American aggression throughout the world. While Jolie might present herself as a champion of human rights, working with the very institutions responsible for destroying those rights around the globe undermines this assertion.
Feature photo | Hollywood actress Angelina Jolie addresses a press conference at Kutupalong refugee camp in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, Feb. 5, 2019. Photo | AP
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.


mintpressnews--2020-11-05--The Military-Industrial Complex, Israeli-Style. New Docuseries Touts Virtues of “Iron Dome”

A new docuseries produced in Israel chronicles the development and use of Israel ’ s multi-billion dollar , U.S.-subsidized Iron Dome missile defense system .
The mechanism , an extension of America ’ s own military-industrial complex , is designed to intercept primitive rockets from Gaza and epitomizes Israel ’ s approach to Palestinian resistance : denial and disproportionality .
These factors also play a part in Israel ’ s defense industry as a whole – an enterprise that profits from the suffering of Palestinians who are forced to live under the thumb of modern-day colonialism and occupation by Israel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Palestinians oppose their systemic oppression in a David vs. Goliath scenario , resisting their occupier with homemade rockets ; while Israel , one of the largest militaries in the world , uses the most modern and sophisticated weaponry on the planet to terrorize its victims .
Israel is both joining and competing with the U.S. domination of the global weapons industry .
The three-hour series entitled “ Iron Dome ” premiered around the world last month in Hebrew on Izzy , a platform that calls itself “ the new way to experience Israel.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ town of Sderot , near the Gaza border , as they look back on the past twenty years or so and discuss their two primary enemies : rockets , and an Israeli government that for a long time didn ’ t seem to care about them .
The first rocket came from Gaza in 2001 and the first rocket fatality in 2004 .
By 2007 , 10 Israelis had been killed – all but one in Sderot – and the Israeli government , at last , got behind the development of a missile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Israel came down hard on Gaza in the winter of 2008-2009 in hopes of bringing an end to the rockets that had by then taken 12 Israeli lives .
The incursion , which featured Israel ’ s latest weaponry at the time , killed 1,400 Palestinians , over 450 of them women and children , and nine Israelis .
The “ Iron Dome ” series does not mention these statistics , nor does it divulge the source of Palestinian anger and resentment : being kept illegally in exile in Gaza , and under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world ’ s largest open-air prison , with a dense population of nearly two million people with no ability to leave .
Israel retains complete control of its border and not even humanitarian supplies , human rights monitors , or journalists are allowed to enter .
This brutal Israeli blockade has been in place since 2007 , severely limiting Gazans ’ access to food , medicine , and other staples , and earning the enclave the nickname “ world ’ s largest open-air prison ” and the designation “ unlivable.
” Its two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ severe shortage of drinking water , electricity – and hope .
Suicide rates have been increasing at an alarming rate .
Israelis interviewed in the series appear unaware of these realities – and indeed , Jewish Israeli citizens , on the whole , are in the dark about the realities of occupation as the Israeli government keeps Palestinians behind walls and out of sight .
The “ Iron Dome ” docuseries is a continuation of this invisibility , and by extension , the invisibility of oppressed people under the fist of the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dahiya Doctrine of “ wielding disproportionate force , ” as evidenced in the 2008 incursion , and again in 2012 and 2014 , has been part and parcel of the country ’ s wartime strategy since its birth .
Dahiya has resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians , as well as the destruction of schools , hospitals , United Nations buildings , critical infrastructure , and entire neighborhoods .
Human rights organizations have documented and criticized the unlawful practice for years , including UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur Richard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no less than “ state terrorism.
” Both Israel and the U.S. have been vehemently resisting – with support from Congress – global attempts to hold them accountable for war crimes in the International Criminal Court ( ICC ) and Donald Trump has threatened to cut aid to countries that resist American and Israeli impunity .
Israeli disproportionality is conspicuous not just in wartime , but also in times of relative calm .
The “ Hamas is a terrorist organization ” trope is just one example .
Israel uses the label “ terrorist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( which have become so frequent that most media rarely reports on them anymore ) , and then for Israel ’ s refusal to allow parts and materials to enter Gaza for repairs to infrastructure and buildings .
The characterization ignores the political and social welfare arms of the group , denies the legal claims to resistance against oppression – and justifies Israel ’ s many gratuitous human rights abuses .
Near the end of the “ Iron Dome.
” the mayor of Sderot points out : But Israel has bigger fish to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ territories .
Its defense industry – of which Iron Dome is the tip of the iceberg – has global ramifications .
Economy-minded Americans should know that Israel is not only front-end unloading their tax dollars as military aid ( circa $ 10 million a day – weekends and holidays included ) , but also poaching us from the back end , costing the U.S. in both revenue and jobs .
Standard operating procedure requires military aid from the U.S. to be spent in the U.S. , but Congress devised special rules allowing Israel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military aid inside its own country .
Of the $ 3.8 billion per year that should cycle back into our economy in the form of weapon purchases , only about $ 2.6 billion makes it – an amount that still contributes generously to both the U.S. military-industrial complex and its Israeli counterpart .
Since 1948 , the U.S. has given Israel $ 6.9 billion for various missile defense systems – in addition to over $ 100 billion in other military aid and $ 34 billion in economic aid ( in current , non-inflation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ encroaching on U.S. defense customers – especially since Trump bought Israel some new Arab allies who may now prefer to shop locally .
Not only is Israel undercutting U.S. arms sales , but it doesn ’ t always play by the rules .
In 2018 , Israel refurbished and tried to resell American made equipment to Croatia , without U.S. permission .
That sale was quashed , but Israel ’ s Defense Ministry and defense industry operate secretively , rarely revealing who their customers are .
They reportedly have customers in Canada and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Africa and Latin America .
Israel is playing fast and loose with its most generous ally in yet another way .
Since 2010 , the United States has sunk $ 5.5 billion of taxpayer money into the Iron Dome project .
As reported by Breaking Defense , in 2019 Congress “ effectively compelled a reluctant [ US ] Army ” to buy two Iron Domes at a cost of $ 373 million .
After filling the order , however , Israel refused to share critical proprietary information , severely limiting the usefulness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ironically , in 2016 , the U.S. was willing to disclose F-35 source codes to Israel – and no other countries . )
For those more interested in peace and justice than economics , there is much more to object to .
Israel is profiting not only at American expense , but also ( and more so ) at Palestinian expense – as well as exporting oppression around the world .
While Palestinians have been essentially unarmed since 1993 , the Israeli military ( IDF ) has built a massive arsenal of weapons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great part to U.S. aid .
Palestinian resistance against the Israeli occupation consists almost entirely of homemade rockets and incendiary balloons from Gaza , and the occasional individual knife attack by a frustrated resident of the West Bank .
The narrator of the “ Iron Dome ” docuseries describes Gaza ’ s rockets as “ made from stolen metal street poles…a pipe as wide as a Coca-Cola bottle…just a piece of flying metal ” stuffed with fertilizer that Gazan Palestinians dried on their roofs .
While the rockets may cost $ 100 each @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less ) , an anti-rocket missile has a price tag of $ 50,000 , and the launcher itself around $ 50 million .
( A new product , the Light Blade , was developed specifically to shoot down the balloons . )
The documentary depicts Israelis running for bomb shelters when an incoming rocket is detected but omits footage of Palestinians who have nowhere to hide during an airstrike .
The billions in research and development , and the expense of manufacturing and operating military equipment like Iron Dome , only makes sense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Israeli defense sector develops technologically advanced weaponry , spyware , and missile defense equipment – and manufactures about five times more than it needs .
Israeli export deals in 2019 alone totaled over $ 7 billion , making it one of the top defense exporters in the world .
As a floor model , the Iron Dome ’ s capabilities are showcased for potential customers every time a rocket launched from Gaza is intercepted by a $ 50,000 anti-rocket missile .
An Israeli defense contractor confirmed that following IDF attacks on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] a big leap in the number of foreign customers .
We market aggressively abroad as it is , but the IDF ’ s actions definitely affect our work.
” The link between the military and the weapons industry couldn ’ t be clearer .
Because rockets from Gaza are rarely lethal , some experts use words like “ asymmetrical warfare ” and “ repression of protests ” to describe the Israeli product line .
Economic researcher Shir Hever points out that demand for Israeli arms is “ highest among governments facing high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact , ” Hever says , “ the Gaza Strip becomes more than a laboratory for Israeli explosives .
It is a laboratory for a social experiment in which an entire population is incarcerated and isolated , controlled from the land , the sea and the air , and sustained with the assistance of international aid ( for which Israel doesn ’ t have to pay ) .
” Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian , who has studied Israeli military weapon use in Palestinian neighborhoods , adds , “ Palestinian spaces are laboratories [ where ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” are tested and then showcased for the consumption of the global arms market .
The Great March of Return – Gaza ’ s 20-month0long weekly protest in 2018 and 2019 that drew tens of thousands of participants – was , for Israel , yet another “ opportunity to develop new means to put down demonstrations , ” to create yet more high-tech solutions to low-tech issues .
Television shows like “ Iron Dome ” serve to perpetuate myths and obfuscate truths .
Meanwhile , Israel creates new forms of oppression , tests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them to those with the money and the will to oppress others .
Kathryn Shihadah writes for MintPress News and If Americans Knew .
She speaks regularly about the injustice and demonization Palestinians face at the hands of Israel with complicity from the United States , especially to Christian audiences .
Kathryn has lived in the Middle East for ten years and has traveled extensively .
She blogs at PalestineHome.org .

A new docuseries produced in Israel chronicles the development and use of Israel’s multi-billion dollar, U.S.-subsidized Iron Dome missile defense system. The mechanism, an extension of America’s own military-industrial complex, is designed to intercept primitive rockets from Gaza and epitomizes Israel’s approach to Palestinian resistance: denial and disproportionality.
These factors also play a part in Israel’s defense industry as a whole – an enterprise that profits from the suffering of Palestinians who are forced to live under the thumb of modern-day colonialism and occupation by Israel’s structure of institutionalized apartheid. Palestinians oppose their systemic oppression in a David vs. Goliath scenario, resisting their occupier with homemade rockets; while Israel, one of the largest militaries in the world, uses the most modern and sophisticated weaponry on the planet to terrorize its victims.
Israel is both joining and competing with the U.S. domination of the global weapons industry. The three-hour series entitled “Iron Dome” premiered around the world last month in Hebrew on Izzy, a platform that calls itself “the new way to experience Israel.”
Denial of facts
The series features Israelis from the town of Sderot, near the Gaza border, as they look back on the past twenty years or so and discuss their two primary enemies: rockets, and an Israeli government that for a long time didn’t seem to care about them.
The first rocket came from Gaza in 2001 and the first rocket fatality in 2004. By 2007, 10 Israelis had been killed – all but one in Sderot – and the Israeli government, at last, got behind the development of a missile defense system: the Iron Dome.
Israel came down hard on Gaza in the winter of 2008-2009 in hopes of bringing an end to the rockets that had by then taken 12 Israeli lives. The incursion, which featured Israel’s latest weaponry at the time, killed 1,400 Palestinians, over 450 of them women and children, and nine Israelis.
The “Iron Dome” series does not mention these statistics, nor does it divulge the source of Palestinian anger and resentment: being kept illegally in exile in Gaza, and under occupation since 1967. Gaza is the world’s largest open-air prison, with a dense population of nearly two million people with no ability to leave. Israel retains complete control of its border and not even humanitarian supplies, human rights monitors, or journalists are allowed to enter.
This brutal Israeli blockade has been in place since 2007, severely limiting Gazans’ access to food, medicine, and other staples, and earning the enclave the nickname “world’s largest open-air prison” and the designation “unlivable.” Its two million residents grapple with malnutrition, a severe shortage of drinking water, electricity – and hope. Suicide rates have been increasing at an alarming rate.
Israelis interviewed in the series appear unaware of these realities – and indeed, Jewish Israeli citizens, on the whole, are in the dark about the realities of occupation as the Israeli government keeps Palestinians behind walls and out of sight.
The “Iron Dome” docuseries is a continuation of this invisibility, and by extension, the invisibility of oppressed people under the fist of the U.S. military-industrial complex as well.
The Dahiya Doctrine
The Israeli Dahiya Doctrine of “wielding disproportionate force,” as evidenced in the 2008 incursion, and again in 2012 and 2014, has been part and parcel of the country’s wartime strategy since its birth.
Dahiya has resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians, as well as the destruction of schools, hospitals, United Nations buildings, critical infrastructure, and entire neighborhoods.
Human rights organizations have documented and criticized the unlawful practice for years, including UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur Richard Falk, who called this ongoing strategy no less than “state terrorism.”
Both Israel and the U.S. have been vehemently resisting – with support from Congress – global attempts to hold them accountable for war crimes in the International Criminal Court (ICC) and Donald Trump has threatened to cut aid to countries that resist American and Israeli impunity.
Israeli disproportionality is conspicuous not just in wartime, but also in times of relative calm. The “Hamas is a terrorist organization” trope is just one example.
Israel uses the label “terrorist” to blame Hamas for Israeli airstrikes (which have become so frequent that most media rarely reports on them anymore), and then for Israel’s refusal to allow parts and materials to enter Gaza for repairs to infrastructure and buildings.
The characterization ignores the political and social welfare arms of the group, denies the legal claims to resistance against oppression – and justifies Israel’s many gratuitous human rights abuses.
Near the end of the “Iron Dome.” the mayor of Sderot points out:
The Iron Dome is a device. In order to solve the problem with Gaza, we need a policy. Either use all our might in a military operation and uproot the problem, or strive for peace with all our might.”
Israel chose the former.
But Israel has bigger fish to fry than “just” the Palestinian territories. Its defense industry – of which Iron Dome is the tip of the iceberg – has global ramifications.
Free money
Economy-minded Americans should know that Israel is not only front-end unloading their tax dollars as military aid (circa $10 million a day – weekends and holidays included), but also poaching us from the back end, costing the U.S. in both revenue and jobs.
Standard operating procedure requires military aid from the U.S. to be spent in the U.S., but Congress devised special rules allowing Israel to spend about a quarter of our military aid inside its own country. Of the $3.8 billion per year that should cycle back into our economy in the form of weapon purchases, only about $2.6 billion makes it – an amount that still contributes generously to both the U.S. military-industrial complex and its Israeli counterpart.
Since 1948, the U.S. has given Israel $6.9 billion for various missile defense systems – in addition to over $100 billion in other military aid and $34 billion in economic aid (in current, non-inflation adjusted dollars).
Playing dirty
Israel has been encroaching on U.S. defense customers – especially since Trump bought Israel some new Arab allies who may now prefer to shop locally.
Not only is Israel undercutting U.S. arms sales, but it doesn’t always play by the rules. In 2018, Israel refurbished and tried to resell American made equipment to Croatia, without U.S. permission.
That sale was quashed, but Israel’s Defense Ministry and defense industry operate secretively, rarely revealing who their customers are. They reportedly have customers in Canada and several European countries, as well as in Africa and Latin America.
Israel is playing fast and loose with its most generous ally in yet another way.
Since 2010, the United States has sunk $5.5 billion of taxpayer money into the Iron Dome project. As reported by Breaking Defense, in 2019 Congress “effectively compelled a reluctant [US] Army” to buy two Iron Domes at a cost of $373 million. After filling the order, however, Israel refused to share critical proprietary information, severely limiting the usefulness of the equipment for Americans. (Ironically, in 2016, the U.S. was willing to disclose F-35 source codes to Israel – and no other countries.)
For those more interested in peace and justice than economics, there is much more to object to. Israel is profiting not only at American expense, but also (and more so) at Palestinian expense – as well as exporting oppression around the world.
“Overkill”
While Palestinians have been essentially unarmed since 1993, the Israeli military (IDF) has built a massive arsenal of weapons for use against them – thanks in great part to U.S. aid. Palestinian resistance against the Israeli occupation consists almost entirely of homemade rockets and incendiary balloons from Gaza, and the occasional individual knife attack by a frustrated resident of the West Bank.
The narrator of the “Iron Dome” docuseries describes Gaza’s rockets as “made from stolen metal street poles…a pipe as wide as a Coca-Cola bottle…just a piece of flying metal” stuffed with fertilizer that Gazan Palestinians dried on their roofs.
While the rockets may cost $100 each to manufacture (and incendiary balloons much less), an anti-rocket missile has a price tag of $50,000, and the launcher itself around $50 million. (A new product, the Light Blade, was developed specifically to shoot down the balloons.)
The documentary depicts Israelis running for bomb shelters when an incoming rocket is detected but omits footage of Palestinians who have nowhere to hide during an airstrike.
Military-Industrial Complex, Israeli-style
The billions in research and development, and the expense of manufacturing and operating military equipment like Iron Dome, only makes sense in the context of global arms sales.
The Israeli defense sector develops technologically advanced weaponry, spyware, and missile defense equipment – and manufactures about five times more than it needs. Israeli export deals in 2019 alone totaled over $7 billion, making it one of the top defense exporters in the world.
As a floor model, the Iron Dome’s capabilities are showcased for potential customers every time a rocket launched from Gaza is intercepted by a $50,000 anti-rocket missile.
An Israeli defense contractor confirmed that following IDF attacks on Gaza, his industry “[sees] a big leap in the number of foreign customers. We market aggressively abroad as it is, but the IDF’s actions definitely affect our work.” The link between the military and the weapons industry couldn’t be clearer.
Profile of a customer
Because rockets from Gaza are rarely lethal, some experts use words like “asymmetrical warfare” and “repression of protests” to describe the Israeli product line.
Economic researcher Shir Hever points out that demand for Israeli arms is “highest among governments facing high inequality and social unrest…”
“In fact,” Hever says, “the Gaza Strip becomes more than a laboratory for Israeli explosives. It is a laboratory for a social experiment in which an entire population is incarcerated and isolated, controlled from the land, the sea and the air, and sustained with the assistance of international aid (for which Israel doesn’t have to pay).”
Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, who has studied Israeli military weapon use in Palestinian neighborhoods, adds, “Palestinian spaces are laboratories [where] products and services of state-sponsored security corporations” are tested and then showcased for the consumption of the global arms market.
The Great March of Return – Gaza’s 20-month0long weekly protest in 2018 and 2019 that drew tens of thousands of participants – was, for Israel, yet another “opportunity to develop new means to put down demonstrations,” to create yet more high-tech solutions to low-tech issues.
Television shows like “Iron Dome” serve to perpetuate myths and obfuscate truths. Meanwhile, Israel creates new forms of oppression, tests them out on Palestinians, and exports them to those with the money and the will to oppress others.
Feature photo | Graphic by Antonio Cabrera
Kathryn Shihadah writes for MintPress News and If Americans Knew. She speaks regularly about the injustice and demonization Palestinians face at the hands of Israel with complicity from the United States, especially to Christian audiences. Kathryn has lived in the Middle East for ten years and has traveled extensively. She blogs at PalestineHome.org.


mintpressnews--2020-11-06--America’s Election Debacle Highlights Anti-Democratic Hijinks of Both Parties

Dan Cohen is a journalist and filmmaker .
He has produced widely distributed video reports and print dispatches from across @ @ @ @ @ former correspondent at RT America and now serves as a correspondent for Behind the Headlines @ @ @ @ @ DanCohen3000 .

Dan Cohen is a journalist and filmmaker. He has produced widely distributed video reports and print dispatches from across Israel-Palestine. Dan is a former correspondent at RT America and now serves as a correspondent for Behind the Headlines. He tweets at @DanCohen3000.


mintpressnews--2020-11-06--Mexico to Redraw Drug War Relationship with the US After Mexican General’s Arrest

The arrest of Mexican General Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda at LAX in October was the culmination of a secret operation carried out by the U.S. Justice Department and the DEA .
The operation was not disclosed to the Mexican government of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador ( AMLO ) before his general ’ s capture .
In one of his daily morning addresses after the fact , AMLO admitted that the news caught him by surprise – a statement he later retracted in an effort to save face and avoid scrutiny into the lack of any provision in Mexican law , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. , to compel their powerful northern neighbor to disclose specific details of ongoing operations .
Such a bold attack on the sovereignty of another nation is not exceptional behavior for the only superpower on the block , which has historically bullied , blackmailed , and murdered leaders around the world .
Nevertheless , the unilateral detention of a foreign military official to face a criminal proceeding in a United States court is a watershed moment in the forty years of the so-called “ war on drugs ” .
From the beginning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nationals in American courts has been a permanent feature .
Extradition has figured prominently in drug war tactics .
The U.S. demands it as a condition for all of its partners in the ostensible fight against organized , multi-billion-dollar drug cartels , which since the late ‘ 90s has been led by U.S. Southern Command .
The issue nearly toppled the Colombian government during the violent clashes of the Pablo Escobar years , as the drug kingpin made extradition the center of his crusade against his state persecutors .
The invasion of Panama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s aggressive intentions to the rest of Latin America when it deployed Navy SEALS and other special forces to capture one of its oldest covert assets in Manuel Noriega .
The case of General Cienfuegos , who was apprehended at an airport without any prior arrangement with the Mexican government , reveals the flagrant contempt America ’ s federal law enforcement agencies have for the laws of other nations .
At the same time , the absence of a formal extradition request on the part of the U.S. could be a clue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arrest , which has AMLO thinking twice about his relationship with the United States surrounding drug war policy .
In a recent interview with Proceso , Mexico ’ s Secretary of State , Marcelo Ebrard confirmed that a decision has been made to revisit all cooperation agreements with the DEA as a result of the General ’ s arrest .
“ Everything will have to change , ” Ebrard said and warned that although there would be cooperation , it would be “ on different terms.
” Six days after the DEA announced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ operation targeting the Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generación ( CJNG ) called Project Python ( which netted over 700 arrests and millions in cash , arms , and narcotics ) the Mexican government requested information from the U.S. Justice Department about American drug cartels in a letter addressed to U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr in March .
Through the official missive , AMLO and his foreign minister asked the DoJ to provide more actionable details regarding American drug cartels .
Among those mentioned in the letter to Barr are the Hells Angels , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 18 , whose extensive links to Mexican cartels like CJNG demand that any relevant information on these organizations be shared with Mexico .
The request is based on revelations made a month before by Arizona ’ s DEA Special Agent in Charge ( SAC ) , Polo Ruiz , who admitted in an interview with Proceso cited in the letter , that American drug cartels have established their own territories in the United States , and while they do work with Mexican cartels , operate independently .
The agent ’ s admission marks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has ever recognized the existence of these groups , spurring the Mexican government to bring it up directly in official state-to-state correspondence after the agency published a list of corporations identified in Project Python as money laundering outfits .
All the companies named via Treasury ’ s Office of Foreign Assets Control ( OFAC ) were Mexican and omitted any mention of American companies .
Barr ’ s response came about a month later in mid-April .
America ’ s top cop assured AMLO that he had instructed representatives of the DEA in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their Mexican partners and counterparts as soon as the COVID-19 crisis permitted .
As for the queries about American companies , Barr extended nothing more than hearsay from DEA agents who claimed to be working on the matter with the Mexican Treasury .
Operation “ Godfather , ” as the scheme to capture Cienfuegos was called , was executed without the knowledge of any of the multiple Mexican anti-narcotic agencies ostensibly working in concert with the DEA and came months after Barr ’ s deafening silence on the matter of shared intelligence with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Defense is facing three counts of drug trafficking and one count of money laundering in a U.S. District Court in Brooklyn , NY .
His defense attorney – also Bill Cosby ’ s attorney – was the lead prosecutor for the largest money laundering case in U.S. history , known as Operation Casablanca , which targeted several Mexican banks and Mexican bank officials in 1998 just before Mexico lifted a ban on foreign banks , which were expelled from the country by President Lopez Portillo more than a decade earlier – a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ growth of drug cartels in Mexico and which I covered at length in part two of my documentary series , “ Borderline : The Unhinged Truth About the Drug War.
” According to J. Jesús Esquivel ’ s article in Proceso , Mexico has 54 DEA agents operating largely at their own discretion inside Mexican national territory .
Douglas Valentine , interviewed by MintPress for this report , suggests there are likely hundreds of additional undercover agents roaming the country .
Valentine unpacked the secret history of federal drug law enforcement in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trace the involvement of American intelligence agency , military , and federal law enforcement personnel in the facilitation of world-wide drug trafficking operations .
His earlier work on the Phoenix Program established Valentine as a leading investigative journalist working to shed light on some of the darkest activities of the U.S government .
On the arrest of General Cienfuegos , Valentine asserts that “ it is exactly what it looks like , ” meaning that the brazen affront to Mexico ’ s national sovereignty was a message to its leadership discouraging any further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the letter to Barr ) seeking information about American drug cartels in order to identify the real distribution networks and the flow of illicit gains through the American and international banking system , that ultimately make the drug trade possible .
“ A Mexican can ’ t bring drugs into the United States , say 500kg of drugs , and do anything with it , ” explains Valentine .
“ There has to be an infrastructure and people waiting to receive it .
Motorcycle gangs like the Hells Angels , Bandidos and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dixie Mafia , ” mentioned in Mexico ’ s March request are used as “ frontmen ” by powerful American organized crime groups , says Valentine .
But , points out that the major markets like New York , L.A. , and others are controlled by the mob .
“ The Hells Angels aren ’ t going to be able to New York City and distribute it , ” says Valentine , and “ to have those systems set up , you need the mafia , which has police protection , political protection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bill Barr seems to be protecting by rebuffing Mexico ’ s request and pulling a mafia Don move on its southern neighbor by hanging its dirty laundry for the world to see .
“ The CIA knows from its surveillance of communications and its agents inside the Mexican army who all the top people are , ” and they can drag them out into the sunlight anytime they want to preserve the pretense of law enforcement , justify budget increases or send veiled warnings to other heads of states when they are asking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of U.S. intelligence and agencies like the DEA , FBI , and ICE , to name just a few , into Mexico ’ s military and law enforcement establishment is a reality that began to take shape in the 1940s through a burgeoning relationship between Mexican law enforcement and American intelligence .
These ties have grown exponentially since Reagan made the war on drugs a matter of national security and opened the door for the Defense Department to get in on the action through bi-lateral drug war treaties , like the Merida Initiative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then Mexican counterpart , Felipe Calderón in 2008 .
Similar bilateral agreements exist all across Latin America and have given the United States a privileged position within the law enforcement and military operations of many countries throughout the region .
Over the course of the war on drugs , American influence over the increased militarization of police in Mexico , Colombia , and other countries have allowed them to shape security policy to a large degree .
The results for Mexico have been catastrophic .
Death tolls often surpass those of the wars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world .
An especially gruesome incident in 2011 expertly covered by Ginger Thompson , exposed the sheer disdain by agencies like the DEA and the FBI for the lives of innocent people , who – in this particular case – were left at the mercy of a notoriously murderous cartel leader after the drug enforcement agency ’ s dubious handling of sensitive intelligence .
AMLO ’ s promise to take a different tack on confronting the cartel problem in Mexico by reducing its dependence on state violence might be raising alarm bells in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to put the fear of god in the leadership of America ’ s largest trading partner .
If AMLO ’ s desire to reshape the bilateral relationship between the United States and Mexico is sincere , then we could be looking at a real turning point in U.S.-Mexico relations and a return to an era when Mexico ’ s political class regarded its ‘ distant neighbor ’ – to borrow a phrase – with far more suspicion .
By all appearances , Mexico ’ s president seems to want to help his own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Mexicans can say about most former presidents .
Compared to mega grifters like ex-president , Carlos Salinas de Gortari , who stole millions directly from pensioners and set the stage for the re-introduction of foreign global money-laundering outfits like HSBC into the country , AMLO is King Solomon .
The Mexican president has been taking a lot of heat since taking office in 2018 from upper and middle-class sectors over what they consider his radical leftist policies .
Large demonstrations have been taking place in Mexico City over the last several weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the majority of Mexicans , who are not part of these economic brackets , support his presidency and appreciate his populist rhetoric .
At the very least , AMLO has stated unequivocally that the Mexican government has no plans to foot the bill for General Cienfuegos ’ legal fees , which could hover between $ 800 and $ 1,000 per billable hour according to reports .
The suggestion that Mexico should tap the federal budget to pay for the General ’ s high-priced defense team came from the opposition party ( PRI ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to protect the Mexican armed forces from foreign law enforcement agencies .
The nature of such legislation might well be at the core of the issue surrounding the unilateral detention of a military general and goes to the heart of the transnational justice system , which the U.S. has been informally implementing through its drug war policies and which poses a fatal threat to the sovereignty and self-determination of any independent nation in Latin America and beyond .
It ’ s no secret that high-ranking members of the Mexican military have been vital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Mexican soil .
It is the only entity in the country with the capacity to move the narcotics “ clandestinely from ports of entry in Mexico up to the American border , ” according to Valentine .
Cartel leaders often answer to one or another official at some level of the Mexican federal government , ranging from a hotshot federal police chief to the president of the Mexican republic itself .
The corruption of Mexico ’ s institutions is legendary among its own people , who rarely give politicians – or anyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefit of the doubt .
Contempt of power is a cultural idiosyncrasy and no one who intends to hold any kind of office or rank in Mexico is above reproach in a country where impunity rules the day .
In the United States , however , the vast network of military , law enforcement , and intelligence operatives crawling all over the dark underbelly of the global drug trade are exempt from scrutiny .
Their principal roles in the movement of illicit drugs all over the world runs contrary to the carefully-crafted do-gooder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collapse of the American socio-political consciousness .
The corruption and impunity in America hides behind its own legal code and is jealously guarded behind a rhetorical veneer of exceptionalism that the Church committee , Vietnam , and the string of political assassinations had all but shattered in the 1960s .
More recently , the seminal work of journalist Gary Webb exposed the nexus between the global drug trade and the American establishment , which has rebounded in remarkable fashion to conceal the extent of the corruption and impunity , once again .
William @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the very people directly involved in sweeping the sordid past and atrocious activities of programs like MKULTRA , COINTELPRO , and Iran-Contra under the rug .
As U.S. Attorney General , he continues to do the same when uncomfortable questions arise about the role that American drug traffickers , corporations , and banks are really playing in the ostensible fight against drugs .
Feature photo | Then-Secretary of Defense Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda , right , and Undersecretary Noe Sandoval Alcazar , left , gesture directions to soldiers marching past , during a review @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Independence Day parade , in Mexico City , Sept. 14 , 2016 .
Rebecca Blackwell | AP

The arrest of Mexican General Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda at LAX in October was the culmination of a secret operation carried out by the U.S. Justice Department and the DEA. The operation was not disclosed to the Mexican government of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) before his general’s capture.
In one of his daily morning addresses after the fact, AMLO admitted that the news caught him by surprise – a statement he later retracted in an effort to save face and avoid scrutiny into the lack of any provision in Mexican law, or in bilateral drug war agreements signed with the U.S., to compel their powerful northern neighbor to disclose specific details of ongoing operations.
Such a bold attack on the sovereignty of another nation is not exceptional behavior for the only superpower on the block, which has historically bullied, blackmailed, and murdered leaders around the world. Nevertheless, the unilateral detention of a foreign military official to face a criminal proceeding in a United States court is a watershed moment in the forty years of the so-called “war on drugs”.
From the beginning of the disastrous policy, trying foreign nationals in American courts has been a permanent feature. Extradition has figured prominently in drug war tactics. The U.S. demands it as a condition for all of its partners in the ostensible fight against organized, multi-billion-dollar drug cartels, which since the late ‘90s has been led by U.S. Southern Command.
The issue nearly toppled the Colombian government during the violent clashes of the Pablo Escobar years, as the drug kingpin made extradition the center of his crusade against his state persecutors. The invasion of Panama just a few years earlier signaled Washington’s aggressive intentions to the rest of Latin America when it deployed Navy SEALS and other special forces to capture one of its oldest covert assets in Manuel Noriega.
The case of General Cienfuegos, who was apprehended at an airport without any prior arrangement with the Mexican government, reveals the flagrant contempt America’s federal law enforcement agencies have for the laws of other nations. At the same time, the absence of a formal extradition request on the part of the U.S. could be a clue about the true motivation behind the high-profile arrest, which has AMLO thinking twice about his relationship with the United States surrounding drug war policy.
In a recent interview with Proceso, Mexico’s Secretary of State, Marcelo Ebrard confirmed that a decision has been made to revisit all cooperation agreements with the DEA as a result of the General’s arrest. “Everything will have to change,” Ebrard said and warned that although there would be cooperation, it would be “on different terms.”
Operation Godfather
Six days after the DEA announced the results of a large, multi-agency operation targeting the Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generación (CJNG) called Project Python (which netted over 700 arrests and millions in cash, arms, and narcotics) the Mexican government requested information from the U.S. Justice Department about American drug cartels in a letter addressed to U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr in March.
Through the official missive, AMLO and his foreign minister asked the DoJ to provide more actionable details regarding American drug cartels. Among those mentioned in the letter to Barr are the Hells Angels, Bandidos, Gangster Disciples, and Calle 18, whose extensive links to Mexican cartels like CJNG demand that any relevant information on these organizations be shared with Mexico.
The request is based on revelations made a month before by Arizona’s DEA Special Agent in Charge (SAC), Polo Ruiz, who admitted in an interview with Proceso cited in the letter, that American drug cartels have established their own territories in the United States, and while they do work with Mexican cartels, operate independently.
The agent’s admission marks the first time an active DEA official has ever recognized the existence of these groups, spurring the Mexican government to bring it up directly in official state-to-state correspondence after the agency published a list of corporations identified in Project Python as money laundering outfits. All the companies named via Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) were Mexican and omitted any mention of American companies.
Barr’s response came about a month later in mid-April. America’s top cop assured AMLO that he had instructed representatives of the DEA in the U.S. Embassy to get together with their Mexican partners and counterparts as soon as the COVID-19 crisis permitted. As for the queries about American companies, Barr extended nothing more than hearsay from DEA agents who claimed to be working on the matter with the Mexican Treasury.
Operation “Godfather,” as the scheme to capture Cienfuegos was called, was executed without the knowledge of any of the multiple Mexican anti-narcotic agencies ostensibly working in concert with the DEA and came months after Barr’s deafening silence on the matter of shared intelligence with Mexico.
The former Mexican Secretary of National Defense is facing three counts of drug trafficking and one count of money laundering in a U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, NY. His defense attorney – also Bill Cosby’s attorney – was the lead prosecutor for the largest money laundering case in U.S. history, known as Operation Casablanca, which targeted several Mexican banks and Mexican bank officials in 1998 just before Mexico lifted a ban on foreign banks, which were expelled from the country by President Lopez Portillo more than a decade earlier – a crucial turning point that preceded the exponential growth of drug cartels in Mexico and which I covered at length in part two of my documentary series, “Borderline: The Unhinged Truth About the Drug War.”
The soft invasion
According to J. Jesús Esquivel’s article in Proceso, Mexico has 54 DEA agents operating largely at their own discretion inside Mexican national territory. Douglas Valentine, interviewed by MintPress for this report, suggests there are likely hundreds of additional undercover agents roaming the country.
Valentine unpacked the secret history of federal drug law enforcement in the United States in two recently-published books that trace the involvement of American intelligence agency, military, and federal law enforcement personnel in the facilitation of world-wide drug trafficking operations. His earlier work on the Phoenix Program established Valentine as a leading investigative journalist working to shed light on some of the darkest activities of the U.S government.
On the arrest of General Cienfuegos, Valentine asserts that “it is exactly what it looks like,” meaning that the brazen affront to Mexico’s national sovereignty was a message to its leadership discouraging any further inquiries (like the one made in the letter to Barr) seeking information about American drug cartels in order to identify the real distribution networks and the flow of illicit gains through the American and international banking system, that ultimately make the drug trade possible.
“A Mexican can’t bring drugs into the United States, say 500kg of drugs, and do anything with it,” explains Valentine. “There has to be an infrastructure and people waiting to receive it. Motorcycle gangs like the Hells Angels, Bandidos and other groups collectively referred to as the “Dixie Mafia,” mentioned in Mexico’s March request are used as “frontmen” by powerful American organized crime groups, says Valentine. But, points out that the major markets like New York, L.A., and others are controlled by the mob.
“The Hells Angels aren’t going to be able to New York City and distribute it,” says Valentine, and “to have those systems set up, you need the mafia, which has police protection, political protection”. Such are the networks that Bill Barr seems to be protecting by rebuffing Mexico’s request and pulling a mafia Don move on its southern neighbor by hanging its dirty laundry for the world to see.
“The CIA knows from its surveillance of communications and its agents inside the Mexican army who all the top people are,” and they can drag them out into the sunlight anytime they want to preserve the pretense of law enforcement, justify budget increases or send veiled warnings to other heads of states when they are asking too many questions.
The incredible reach of U.S. intelligence and agencies like the DEA, FBI, and ICE, to name just a few, into Mexico’s military and law enforcement establishment is a reality that began to take shape in the 1940s through a burgeoning relationship between Mexican law enforcement and American intelligence. These ties have grown exponentially since Reagan made the war on drugs a matter of national security and opened the door for the Defense Department to get in on the action through bi-lateral drug war treaties, like the Merida Initiative signed by George W. Bush and his then Mexican counterpart, Felipe Calderón in 2008.
Similar bilateral agreements exist all across Latin America and have given the United States a privileged position within the law enforcement and military operations of many countries throughout the region. Over the course of the war on drugs, American influence over the increased militarization of police in Mexico, Colombia, and other countries have allowed them to shape security policy to a large degree.
The results for Mexico have been catastrophic. Death tolls often surpass those of the wars in the Middle East and around the world. An especially gruesome incident in 2011 expertly covered by Ginger Thompson, exposed the sheer disdain by agencies like the DEA and the FBI for the lives of innocent people, who – in this particular case – were left at the mercy of a notoriously murderous cartel leader after the drug enforcement agency’s dubious handling of sensitive intelligence.
AMLO’s promise to take a different tack on confronting the cartel problem in Mexico by reducing its dependence on state violence might be raising alarm bells in Washington, motivating actions like Operation Godfather to put the fear of god in the leadership of America’s largest trading partner.
A shot in the dark
If AMLO’s desire to reshape the bilateral relationship between the United States and Mexico is sincere, then we could be looking at a real turning point in U.S.-Mexico relations and a return to an era when Mexico’s political class regarded its ‘distant neighbor’ – to borrow a phrase – with far more suspicion.
By all appearances, Mexico’s president seems to want to help his own people, which is more than generations of Mexicans can say about most former presidents. Compared to mega grifters like ex-president, Carlos Salinas de Gortari, who stole millions directly from pensioners and set the stage for the re-introduction of foreign global money-laundering outfits like HSBC into the country, AMLO is King Solomon.
The Mexican president has been taking a lot of heat since taking office in 2018 from upper and middle-class sectors over what they consider his radical leftist policies. Large demonstrations have been taking place in Mexico City over the last several weeks calling for his resignation. But, the majority of Mexicans, who are not part of these economic brackets, support his presidency and appreciate his populist rhetoric.
At the very least, AMLO has stated unequivocally that the Mexican government has no plans to foot the bill for General Cienfuegos’ legal fees, which could hover between $800 and $1,000 per billable hour according to reports. The suggestion that Mexico should tap the federal budget to pay for the General’s high-priced defense team came from the opposition party (PRI) leader, who put forward a proposal to protect the Mexican armed forces from foreign law enforcement agencies.
The nature of such legislation might well be at the core of the issue surrounding the unilateral detention of a military general and goes to the heart of the transnational justice system, which the U.S. has been informally implementing through its drug war policies and which poses a fatal threat to the sovereignty and self-determination of any independent nation in Latin America and beyond.
Mexican standoff
It’s no secret that high-ranking members of the Mexican military have been vital cogs in drug trafficking operations carried out on Mexican soil. It is the only entity in the country with the capacity to move the narcotics “clandestinely from ports of entry in Mexico up to the American border,” according to Valentine. Cartel leaders often answer to one or another official at some level of the Mexican federal government, ranging from a hotshot federal police chief to the president of the Mexican republic itself.
The corruption of Mexico’s institutions is legendary among its own people, who rarely give politicians – or anyone in a position of authority – the benefit of the doubt. Contempt of power is a cultural idiosyncrasy and no one who intends to hold any kind of office or rank in Mexico is above reproach in a country where impunity rules the day.
In the United States, however, the vast network of military, law enforcement, and intelligence operatives crawling all over the dark underbelly of the global drug trade are exempt from scrutiny. Their principal roles in the movement of illicit drugs all over the world runs contrary to the carefully-crafted do-gooder narratives churned out by Hollywood since the collapse of the American socio-political consciousness.
The corruption and impunity in America hides behind its own legal code and is jealously guarded behind a rhetorical veneer of exceptionalism that the Church committee, Vietnam, and the string of political assassinations had all but shattered in the 1960s. More recently, the seminal work of journalist Gary Webb exposed the nexus between the global drug trade and the American establishment, which has rebounded in remarkable fashion to conceal the extent of the corruption and impunity, once again.
William Barr, himself, was one of the very people directly involved in sweeping the sordid past and atrocious activities of programs like MKULTRA, COINTELPRO, and Iran-Contra under the rug. As U.S. Attorney General, he continues to do the same when uncomfortable questions arise about the role that American drug traffickers, corporations, and banks are really playing in the ostensible fight against drugs.
Feature photo | Then-Secretary of Defense Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda, right, and Undersecretary Noe Sandoval Alcazar, left, gesture directions to soldiers marching past, during a review of the troops that will participate in the Independence Day parade, in Mexico City, Sept. 14, 2016. Rebecca Blackwell | AP
Raul Diego is a MintPress News Staff Writer, independent photojournalist, researcher, writer and documentary filmmaker.


mintpressnews--2020-11-06--Did Media Spiking the Ukraine-Burisma Story Win Joe Biden the Election?

It was the classic October Surprise .
Just weeks before the presidential election , conservative newspaper the New York Post released a bombshell report claiming that Joe Biden ’ s son Hunter had introduced his then vice-president father to top executives at Ukrainian energy firm Burisma , just months before the elder Biden pressured government officials in Ukraine into firing a prosecutor investigating the company .
The report was allegedly based on information from a laptop belonging to Hunter Biden , who , despite not having any relevant qualifications , sat on Burisma ’ s board , earning $ 50,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ situations where one outlet publishes a huge scoop , it has become the journalistic norm for other outlets to produce copycat stories , reporting on the reporting .
For example , when The New York Times claimed in June that Russia had been paying Taliban fighters to kill U.S. troops in Afghanistan , virtually the entire media landscape followed suit , repeating the questionable allegations .
Yet this was not the case this time .
Corporate media either ignored the Post ’ s report altogether or attacked it as “ dubious ” ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Economist ) a “ conspiracy ” ( NBC News ) , “ fake news ” ( The Guardian ) , or part of a Russian plan to take Biden down ( CNN ) .
Was the report false ?
MintPress spoke to Jim Naureckas , editor of media watchdog Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting .
“ On the face of it , it ’ s fishy as hell , ” he said .
“ Suddenly , in the last days of the campaign , this mysterious laptop falls into Rudy Giuliani ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ providing exactly the kind of evidence they were thirsting for.
” Certainly , Guiliani , former Mayor of New York City , has spent the last few years running interference for President Trump .
However , certain leaks , particularly those of Hunter Biden ’ s lewd photographs , are clearly real .
Moreover , the Biden campaign offered a conspicuously half-hearted response when asked to confirm or deny the story ’ s veracity .
Whatever corporate media ’ s response , the reaction from the social media giants was far more extreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sharing or linking to the New York Post story .
Indeed , Twitter locked the Post out of its account for two weeks , leading to Republican senator Ted Cruz to condemn CEO Jack Dorsey , claiming he was treating his platform like a “ Democratic Super Pac.
” At least 69 % of Americans use Facebook , with 43 % ( over 140 million people ) getting their news from it .
Twitter is also influential , with nearly a quarter of the country using the service .
Thus , the decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the most important news mediums was an influential one , especially as the Post continues to stand by the veracity of its reporting , staking its reputation upon it .
“ The attempts at social media censorship are a bad precedent , ” Naureckas added .
“ And , if you think this story is not contributing a lot to our understanding of the 2020 race , counter-productive .
Because what the Trump campaign is looking for is not a convincing expose of the Biden family corruption , but a bloody shirt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that this is the story Twitter didn ’ t want you to see will be far more compelling to Trump ’ s base than any actual story could be.
” It is impossible to judge if the story hurt Biden , but one clear casualty of the scandal was a co-founder of investigative news site The Intercept , Glenn Greenwald .
Greenwald , who had a clause in his contract guaranteeing him virtually complete editorial independence , attempted to publish an article critiquing the media for their slavish obedience to the line that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ noted that NPR ’ s Public Editor refused to touch it because , in his words , “ we do not want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories… [ or ] waste the readers ’ and listeners ’ time on stories that are just pure distractions.
” Meanwhile , CBS News reporter Bo Erickson was widely attacked by other journalists for merely asking the Democratic presidential candidate to comment on the Post ’ s allegations .
Instead , editors at The Intercept drew a line , refusing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Greenwald resigned from his position and released it on his new blog .
If he was expecting sympathy from his colleagues , he would be bitterly disappointed .
The Intercept itself described his actions as a “ tantrum , ” and his allegations of censorship as “ preposterous.
” A host of high-profile media figures backed The Intercept and condemned Greenwald .
Perhaps more surprisingly , the knives were out for him even among the staff of The Intercept .
“ Glenn was not ‘ censored ’ — he was edited , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marketing ploy to gin up subscribers for his new Substack .
Are people really going to fall for it ?
” wrote Naomi Klein , also suggesting he was directly and callously helping Donald Trump win re-election : “ Imagine not caring that you are feeding into this garbage at this point in history.
” Greenwald appeared to have few backers in the mainstream press .
One , however , was cult journalist Matt Taibbi , who expressed his exasperation at the groupthink among the corporate media to MintPress .
In a volatile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is hard to keep a job , journalists must know where the hard limits of speech are at their outlets .
When reporters are condemned for challenging a presidential candidate or taking an allegation seriously , it sets a worrying precedent and disciplines journalists into staying well within the bounds of expressible opinion .
Biden appears likely to win a narrow victory over Trump in the presidential election , although Democrats appear to have done less well in the Senate and the House .
Considering the closeness of the result , it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden/Ukraine story made the difference in getting the 77-year-old Delawarian over the line .
As such , it might have been at least as consequential as the infamous Comey letter , which some claim put pay to Hillary Clinton ’ s chances in 2016 and paved the way for Donald Trump .
October Surprises are a feature of most presidential elections .
The Democrats had their own one this year , The New York Times revealing that Trump had paid only $ 750 in taxes in 2016 and 2017 and that he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ further back , the most notorious October Surprise occurred in 1980 , when Ronald Reagan intervened in the Iran hostage crisis to make sure no Americans were released until after the election , robbing President Carter of any good publicity .
Whatever one thinks about Biden or Trump , or the veracity of the Burisma story , the way in which corporate media moved as one to squash the story and how social media giants Facebook and Twitter unilaterally decided that Americans would not be able to see the story and decide for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of power and freedom of speech in society .
Feature photo | Joe Biden , center , his son Hunter Biden , left , and his sister Valerie Biden Owens , right , joined by other family members during a ceremony to name a national road after his late son Joseph R. “ Beau ” Biden III , in the village of Sojevo , Kosov , Aug. 17 , 2016 .
Visar Kryeziu | AP Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News .
After completing his PhD in 2017 he published @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age : Still Manufacturing Consent .
He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

It was the classic October Surprise. Just weeks before the presidential election, conservative newspaper the New York Post released a bombshell report claiming that Joe Biden’s son Hunter had introduced his then vice-president father to top executives at Ukrainian energy firm Burisma, just months before the elder Biden pressured government officials in Ukraine into firing a prosecutor investigating the company.
The report was allegedly based on information from a laptop belonging to Hunter Biden, who, despite not having any relevant qualifications, sat on Burisma’s board, earning $50,000 per month for doing so.
In situations where one outlet publishes a huge scoop, it has become the journalistic norm for other outlets to produce copycat stories, reporting on the reporting. For example, when The New York Times claimed in June that Russia had been paying Taliban fighters to kill U.S. troops in Afghanistan, virtually the entire media landscape followed suit, repeating the questionable allegations. Yet this was not the case this time. Corporate media either ignored the Post’s report altogether or attacked it as “dubious” (CNN) “disinformation” (The Economist) a “conspiracy” (NBC News), “fake news” (The Guardian), or part of a Russian plan to take Biden down (CNN).
Was the report false? MintPress spoke to Jim Naureckas, editor of media watchdog Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. “On the face of it, it’s fishy as hell,” he said. “Suddenly, in the last days of the campaign, this mysterious laptop falls into Rudy Giuliani’s hands, containing a slew of emails providing exactly the kind of evidence they were thirsting for.” Certainly, Guiliani, former Mayor of New York City, has spent the last few years running interference for President Trump. However, certain leaks, particularly those of Hunter Biden’s lewd photographs, are clearly real. Moreover, the Biden campaign offered a conspicuously half-hearted response when asked to confirm or deny the story’s veracity.
Whatever corporate media’s response, the reaction from the social media giants was far more extreme. Both Facebook and Twitter users from sharing or linking to the New York Post story. Indeed, Twitter locked the Post out of its account for two weeks, leading to Republican senator Ted Cruz to condemn CEO Jack Dorsey, claiming he was treating his platform like a “Democratic Super Pac.”
At least 69% of Americans use Facebook, with 43% (over 140 million people) getting their news from it. Twitter is also influential, with nearly a quarter of the country using the service. Thus, the decision to completely censor the story from two of the most important news mediums was an influential one, especially as the Post continues to stand by the veracity of its reporting, staking its reputation upon it.
“The attempts at social media censorship are a bad precedent,” Naureckas added. “And, if you think this story is not contributing a lot to our understanding of the 2020 race, counter-productive. Because what the Trump campaign is looking for is not a convincing expose of the Biden family corruption, but a bloody shirt that they can wave: The fact that this is the story Twitter didn’t want you to see will be far more compelling to Trump’s base than any actual story could be.”
It is impossible to judge if the story hurt Biden, but one clear casualty of the scandal was a co-founder of investigative news site The Intercept, Glenn Greenwald. Greenwald, who had a clause in his contract guaranteeing him virtually complete editorial independence, attempted to publish an article critiquing the media for their slavish obedience to the line that the story was inherently false. He noted that NPR’s Public Editor refused to touch it because, in his words, “we do not want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories… [or] waste the readers’ and listeners’ time on stories that are just pure distractions.” Meanwhile, CBS News reporter Bo Erickson was widely attacked by other journalists for merely asking the Democratic presidential candidate to comment on the Post’s allegations.
Instead, editors at The Intercept drew a line, refusing to publish it. As a result, Greenwald resigned from his position and released it on his new blog. If he was expecting sympathy from his colleagues, he would be bitterly disappointed. The Intercept itself described his actions as a “tantrum,” and his allegations of censorship as “preposterous.” A host of high-profile media figures backed The Intercept and condemned Greenwald. Perhaps more surprisingly, the knives were out for him even among the staff of The Intercept. “Glenn was not ‘censored’ — he was edited, and edited well. Crying censorship is a marketing ploy to gin up subscribers for his new Substack. Are people really going to fall for it?” wrote Naomi Klein, also suggesting he was directly and callously helping Donald Trump win re-election: “Imagine not caring that you are feeding into this garbage at this point in history.”
Greenwald appeared to have few backers in the mainstream press. One, however, was cult journalist Matt Taibbi, who expressed his exasperation at the groupthink among the corporate media to MintPress.
It’s like everything else in this environment — outlets settle on a narrative in the first five minutes and then don’t budge. With Glenn the reaction was, ‘Lol, he thinks editing is censorship, what a baby.’ And they haven’t moved off that. Kind of amazing that no one sees the irony in the herd response to what was essentially a critique of herd journalism.”
In a volatile industry like the media, where it is hard to keep a job, journalists must know where the hard limits of speech are at their outlets. When reporters are condemned for challenging a presidential candidate or taking an allegation seriously, it sets a worrying precedent and disciplines journalists into staying well within the bounds of expressible opinion.
Biden appears likely to win a narrow victory over Trump in the presidential election, although Democrats appear to have done less well in the Senate and the House. Considering the closeness of the result, it is quite possible that the media squashing the Biden/Ukraine story made the difference in getting the 77-year-old Delawarian over the line. As such, it might have been at least as consequential as the infamous Comey letter, which some claim put pay to Hillary Clinton’s chances in 2016 and paved the way for Donald Trump.
October Surprises are a feature of most presidential elections. The Democrats had their own one this year, The New York Times revealing that Trump had paid only $750 in taxes in 2016 and 2017 and that he was $400 million in debt. Going further back, the most notorious October Surprise occurred in 1980, when Ronald Reagan intervened in the Iran hostage crisis to make sure no Americans were released until after the election, robbing President Carter of any good publicity.
Whatever one thinks about Biden or Trump, or the veracity of the Burisma story, the way in which corporate media moved as one to squash the story and how social media giants Facebook and Twitter unilaterally decided that Americans would not be able to see the story and decide for themselves raises profound questions about the nature of power and freedom of speech in society.
Feature photo | Joe Biden, center, his son Hunter Biden, left, and his sister Valerie Biden Owens, right, joined by other family members during a ceremony to name a national road after his late son Joseph R. “Beau” Biden III, in the village of Sojevo, Kosov, Aug. 17, 2016. Visar Kryeziu | AP
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.