mintpressnews--2020-02-13--Can the World’s Second Superpower Rise From the Ashes of Twenty Years of War

February 15 marks the day , 17 years ago , when global demonstrations against the pending Iraq invasion were so massive that the New York Times called world public opinion “ the second superpower.
” But the U.S. ignored it and invaded Iraq anyway .
So what has become of the momentous hopes of that day ?
The U.S. military has not won a war since 1945 , unless you count recovering the tiny colonial outposts of Grenada , Panama and Kuwait , but there is one threat it has consistently outmaneuvered without firing more than a few deadly rifle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this existential threat is the very one that could peacefully cut it down to size and take away its most dangerous and expensive weapons : its own peace-loving citizens .
During the Vietnam War , young Americans facing a life-and-death draft lottery built a powerful anti-war movement .
President Nixon proposed ending the draft as a way to undermine the peace movement , since he believed that young people would stop protesting the war once they were no longer obligated to fight .
In 1973 , the draft was ended , leaving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority of Americans from the deadly impact of America ’ s wars .
Despite the lack of a draft , a new anti-war movement—this time with global reach—sprung up in the period between the crimes of 9/11 and the illegal U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003 .
The February 15th , 2003 , protests were the largest demonstrations in human history , uniting people around the world in opposition to the unthinkable prospect that the U.S. would actually launch its threatened “ shock and awe ” assault on Iraq .
Some 30 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on every continent , including Antarctica .
This massive repudiation of war , memorialized in the documentary We Are Many , led New York Times journalist Patrick E. Tyler to comment that there were now two superpowers on the planet : the United States and world public opinion .
The U.S. war machine demonstrated total disdain for its upstart rival , and unleashed an illegal war based on lies that has now raged on through many phases of violence and chaos for 17 years .
With no end in sight to U.S. and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Somalia , Libya , Syria , Palestine , Yemen and West Africa , and Trump ’ s escalating diplomatic and economic warfare against Iran , Venezuela and North Korea threatening to explode into new wars , where is the second superpower now , when we need it more than ever ?
Since the U.S. assassination of Iran ’ s General Soleimani in Iraq on January 2nd , the peace movement has reemerged onto the streets , including people who marched in February 2003 and new activists too young to remember a time when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There have been three separate days of protest , one on January 4th , another on the 9th and a global day of action on the 25th .
The rallies took place in hundreds of cities , but they did not attract nearly the numbers who came out to protest the pending war with Iraq in 2003 , or even those of the smaller rallies and vigils that continued as the Iraq war spiraled out of control until at least 2007 .
Our failure to stop the U.S. war on Iraq in 2003 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of people active in the U.S. anti-war movement shrank even more after the 2008 election of Barack Obama .
Many people did not want to protest the nation ’ s first black president , and many , including the Nobel Peace Prize Committee , really believed he would be a “ peace president.
” While Obama reluctantly honored Bush ’ s agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw US troops from Iraq and he signed the Iran nuclear deal , he was far from a peace president .
He oversaw a new doctrine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reduced U.S. military casualties , but unleashed an escalation of the war in Afghanistan , a campaign against ISIS in Iraq and Syria that destroyed entire cities , a ten-fold increase in CIA drone strikes on Pakistan , Yemen and Somalia , and bloody proxy wars in Libya and Syria that rage on today .
In the end , Obama spent more on the military and dropped more bombs on more countries than Bush did .
He also refused to hold Bush and his cronies responsible for their war crimes .
Obama ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bush ’ s in restoring peace or stability to any of those countries or improving the lives of their people .
But Obama ’ s “ disguised , quiet , media-free approach ” to war made the U.S. state of endless war much more politically sustainable .
By reducing U.S. casualties and waging war with less fanfare , he moved America ’ s wars farther into the shadows and gave the American public an illusion of peace in the midst of endless war , effectively disarming and dividing the peace movement .
Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up by a vicious campaign against any brave whistleblowers who tried to drag it out into the light .
Jeffrey Sterling , Thomas Drake , Chelsea Manning , John Kiriakou , Edward Snowden and now Julian Assange have been prosecuted and jailed under unprecedented new interpretations of the WWI-era Espionage Act .
With Donald Trump in the White House , we hear Republicans making the same excuses for Trump—who ran on an anti-war platform—that Democrats made for Obama .
First , his supporters accept lip service about wanting to end wars and bring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really wants to do , even as he keeps escalating the wars .
Second , they ask us to be patient because , despite all the real world evidence , they are convinced he is working hard behind the scenes for peace .
Third , in a final cop-out that undermines their other two arguments , they throw up their hands and say that he is “ only ” the president , and the Pentagon or “ deep state ” is too powerful for even him to tame .
Obama and Trump supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political unaccountability to give the man behind the desk where the buck used to stop an entire deck of “ get out of jail free ” cards for endless war and war crimes .
Obama and Trump ’ s “ disguised , quiet , media-free approach ” to war has inoculated America ’ s wars and militarism against the virus of democracy , but new social movements have grown up to tackle problems closer to home .
The financial crisis led to the rise of the Occupy Movement , and now the climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and immigration problems have all provoked new grassroots movements .
Peace advocates have been encouraging these movements to join the call for major Pentagon cuts , insisting that the hundreds of billions saved could help fund everything from Medicare for All to the Green New Deal to free college tuition .
A few sectors of the peace movement have been showing how to use creative tactics and build diverse movements .
The movement for Palestinians ’ human and civil rights includes students , Muslim and Jewish groups , as well as black and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home .
Also inspirational are campaigns for peace on the Korean peninsula led by Korean Americans , such as Women Cross the DMZ , which has brought together women from North Korea , South Korea and the United States to show the Trump administration what real diplomacy looks like .
There have also been successful popular efforts pushing a reluctant Congress to take anti-war positions .
For decades , Congress has been only too happy to leave war-making to the president , abrogating its constitutional role as the only power authorized to declare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there has been a remarkable shift .
In 2019 , both houses of Congress voted to end U.S. support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen and to ban arms sales to Saudi Arabia for the war in Yemen , although President Trump vetoed both bills .
Now Congress is working on bills to explicitly prohibit an unauthorized war on Iran .
These bills prove that public pressure can move Congress , including a Republican-dominated Senate , to reclaim its constitutional powers over war and peace from the executive branch .
Another bright light @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first-term Congresswoman Ilhan Omar , who recently laid out a series of bills called Pathway to PEACE that challenge our militaristic foreign policy .
While her bills will be hard to get passed in Congress , they lay out a marker for where we should be headed .
Omar ’ s office , unlike many others in Congress , actually works directly with grassroots organizations that can push this vision forward .
The presidential election offers an opportunity to push the anti-war agenda .
The most effective and committed anti-war champion in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his call for getting the U.S. out of its imperial interventions and his votes against 84 % of military spending bills since 2013 are reflected not only in his poll numbers but also in the way other Democratic candidates are rushing to take similar positions .
All now say the U.S. should rejoin the Iran nuclear deal ; all have criticized the “ bloated ” Pentagon budget , despite regularly voting for it ; and most have promised to bring U.S. troops home from the greater Middle East .
So , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election year , what are our chances of reviving the world ’ s second superpower and ending America ’ s wars ?
Absent a major new war , we are unlikely to see big demonstrations in the streets .
But two decades of endless war have created a strong anti-war sentiment among the public .
A 2019 Pew Research Center poll found that 62 percent of Americans said the war in Iraq was not worth fighting and 59 percent said the same for the war in Afghanistan .
On Iran , a September @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a mere one-fifth of Americans said the U.S. “ should be prepared to go to war ” to achieve its goals in Iran , while three-quarters said that U.S. goals do not warrant military intervention .
Along with the Pentagon ’ s assessment of how disastrous a war with Iran would be , this public sentiment fueled global protests and condemnation that have temporarily forced Trump to dial down his military escalation and threats against Iran .
So , while our government ’ s war propaganda has convinced many Americans that we are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it has failed to convince most Americans that we are wrong to want to .
As on other issues , activism has two main hurdles to overcome : first to convince people that something is wrong ; and secondly to show them that , by working together to build a popular movement , we can do something about it .
The peace movement ’ s small victories demonstrate that we have more power to challenge U.S. militarism than most Americans realize .
As more peace-loving people in the U.S. and across the world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the second superpower we glimpsed briefly on February 15th , 2003 has the potential to rise stronger , more committed and more determined from the ashes of two decades of war .
A new president like Bernie Sanders in the White House would create a new opening for peace .
But as on many domestic issues , that opening will only bear fruit and overcome the opposition of powerful vested interests if there is a mass movement behind it every step of the way .
If there is a lesson for peace-loving Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is that we can not just walk out of the voting booth and leave it to a champion in the White House to end our wars and bring us peace .
In the final analysis , it really is up to us .
Please join us !
Feature photo | Protesters gather in Times Square to protest recent U.S. military actions in Iraq , Jan. 4 , 2020 , in New York .
Kevin Hagen | AP Medea Benjamin is cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace , and author of several books , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran .
Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist , a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of Blood On Our Hands : the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq .

February 15 marks the day, 17 years ago, when global demonstrations against the pending Iraq invasion were so massive that the New York Times called world public opinion “the second superpower.” But the U.S. ignored it and invaded Iraq anyway. So what has become of the momentous hopes of that day?
The U.S. military has not won a war since 1945, unless you count recovering the tiny colonial outposts of Grenada, Panama and Kuwait, but there is one threat it has consistently outmaneuvered without firing more than a few deadly rifle shots and some tear gas. Ironically, this existential threat is the very one that could peacefully cut it down to size and take away its most dangerous and expensive weapons: its own peace-loving citizens.
During the Vietnam War, young Americans facing a life-and-death draft lottery built a powerful anti-war movement. President Nixon proposed ending the draft as a way to undermine the peace movement, since he believed that young people would stop protesting the war once they were no longer obligated to fight. In 1973, the draft was ended, leaving a volunteer army that insulated the vast majority of Americans from the deadly impact of America’s wars.
Despite the lack of a draft, a new anti-war movement—this time with global reach—sprung up in the period between the crimes of 9/11 and the illegal U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003. The February 15th, 2003, protests were the largest demonstrations in human history, uniting people around the world in opposition to the unthinkable prospect that the U.S. would actually launch its threatened “shock and awe” assault on Iraq. Some 30 million people in 800 cities took part on every continent, including Antarctica. This massive repudiation of war, memorialized in the documentary We Are Many, led New York Times journalist Patrick E. Tyler to comment that there were now two superpowers on the planet: the United States and world public opinion.
The U.S. war machine demonstrated total disdain for its upstart rival, and unleashed an illegal war based on lies that has now raged on through many phases of violence and chaos for 17 years. With no end in sight to U.S. and allied wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Syria, Palestine, Yemen and West Africa, and Trump’s escalating diplomatic and economic warfare against Iran, Venezuela and North Korea threatening to explode into new wars, where is the second superpower now, when we need it more than ever?
Since the U.S. assassination of Iran’s General Soleimani in Iraq on January 2nd, the peace movement has reemerged onto the streets, including people who marched in February 2003 and new activists too young to remember a time when the U.S. was not at war. There have been three separate days of protest, one on January 4th, another on the 9th and a global day of action on the 25th. The rallies took place in hundreds of cities, but they did not attract nearly the numbers who came out to protest the pending war with Iraq in 2003, or even those of the smaller rallies and vigils that continued as the Iraq war spiraled out of control until at least 2007.
Our failure to stop the U.S. war on Iraq in 2003 was deeply discouraging. But the number of people active in the U.S. anti-war movement shrank even more after the 2008 election of Barack Obama. Many people did not want to protest the nation’s first black president, and many, including the Nobel Peace Prize Committee, really believed he would be a “peace president.”
While Obama reluctantly honored Bush’s agreement with the Iraqi government to withdraw US troops from Iraq and he signed the Iran nuclear deal, he was far from a peace president. He oversaw a new doctrine of covert and proxy war that substantially reduced U.S. military casualties, but unleashed an escalation of the war in Afghanistan, a campaign against ISIS in Iraq and Syria that destroyed entire cities, a ten-fold increase in CIA drone strikes on Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, and bloody proxy wars in Libya and Syria that rage on today. In the end, Obama spent more on the military and dropped more bombs on more countries than Bush did. He also refused to hold Bush and his cronies responsible for their war crimes.
Obama’s wars were no more successful than Bush’s in restoring peace or stability to any of those countries or improving the lives of their people. But Obama’s “disguised, quiet, media-free approach” to war made the U.S. state of endless war much more politically sustainable. By reducing U.S. casualties and waging war with less fanfare, he moved America’s wars farther into the shadows and gave the American public an illusion of peace in the midst of endless war, effectively disarming and dividing the peace movement.
Obama’s secretive war policy was backed up by a vicious campaign against any brave whistleblowers who tried to drag it out into the light. Jeffrey Sterling, Thomas Drake, Chelsea Manning, John Kiriakou, Edward Snowden and now Julian Assange have been prosecuted and jailed under unprecedented new interpretations of the WWI-era Espionage Act.
With Donald Trump in the White House, we hear Republicans making the same excuses for Trump—who ran on an anti-war platform—that Democrats made for Obama. First, his supporters accept lip service about wanting to end wars and bring troops home as revealing what the president really wants to do, even as he keeps escalating the wars. Second, they ask us to be patient because, despite all the real world evidence, they are convinced he is working hard behind the scenes for peace. Third, in a final cop-out that undermines their other two arguments, they throw up their hands and say that he is “only” the president, and the Pentagon or “deep state” is too powerful for even him to tame.
Obama and Trump supporters alike have used this shaky tripod of political unaccountability to give the man behind the desk where the buck used to stop an entire deck of “get out of jail free” cards for endless war and war crimes.
Obama and Trump’s “disguised, quiet, media-free approach” to war has inoculated America’s wars and militarism against the virus of democracy, but new social movements have grown up to tackle problems closer to home. The financial crisis led to the rise of the Occupy Movement, and now the climate crisis and America’s entrenched race and immigration problems have all provoked new grassroots movements. Peace advocates have been encouraging these movements to join the call for major Pentagon cuts, insisting that the hundreds of billions saved could help fund everything from Medicare for All to the Green New Deal to free college tuition.
A few sectors of the peace movement have been showing how to use creative tactics and build diverse movements. The movement for Palestinians’ human and civil rights includes students, Muslim and Jewish groups, as well as black and indigenous groups fighting similar struggles here at home. Also inspirational are campaigns for peace on the Korean peninsula led by Korean Americans, such as Women Cross the DMZ, which has brought together women from North Korea, South Korea and the United States to show the Trump administration what real diplomacy looks like.
There have also been successful popular efforts pushing a reluctant Congress to take anti-war positions. For decades, Congress has been only too happy to leave war-making to the president, abrogating its constitutional role as the only power authorized to declare war. Thanks to public pressure, there has been a remarkable shift.
In 2019, both houses of Congress voted to end U.S. support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen and to ban arms sales to Saudi Arabia for the war in Yemen, although President Trump vetoed both bills. Now Congress is working on bills to explicitly prohibit an unauthorized war on Iran. These bills prove that public pressure can move Congress, including a Republican-dominated Senate, to reclaim its constitutional powers over war and peace from the executive branch.
Another bright light in Congress is the pioneering work of first-term Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, who recently laid out a series of bills called Pathway to PEACE that challenge our militaristic foreign policy. While her bills will be hard to get passed in Congress, they lay out a marker for where we should be headed. Omar’s office, unlike many others in Congress, actually works directly with grassroots organizations that can push this vision forward.
The presidential election offers an opportunity to push the anti-war agenda. The most effective and committed anti-war champion in the race is Bernie Sanders. The popularity of his call for getting the U.S. out of its imperial interventions and his votes against 84% of military spending bills since 2013 are reflected not only in his poll numbers but also in the way other Democratic candidates are rushing to take similar positions. All now say the U.S. should rejoin the Iran nuclear deal; all have criticized the “bloated” Pentagon budget, despite regularly voting for it; and most have promised to bring U.S. troops home from the greater Middle East.
So, as we look to the future in this election year, what are our chances of reviving the world’s second superpower and ending America’s wars?
Absent a major new war, we are unlikely to see big demonstrations in the streets. But two decades of endless war have created a strong anti-war sentiment among the public. A 2019 Pew Research Center poll found that 62 percent of Americans said the war in Iraq was not worth fighting and 59 percent said the same for the war in Afghanistan.
On Iran, a September 2019 University of Maryland poll showed that a mere one-fifth of Americans said the U.S. “should be prepared to go to war” to achieve its goals in Iran, while three-quarters said that U.S. goals do not warrant military intervention. Along with the Pentagon’s assessment of how disastrous a war with Iran would be, this public sentiment fueled global protests and condemnation that have temporarily forced Trump to dial down his military escalation and threats against Iran.
So, while our government’s war propaganda has convinced many Americans that we are powerless to stop its catastrophic wars, it has failed to convince most Americans that we are wrong to want to. As on other issues, activism has two main hurdles to overcome: first to convince people that something is wrong; and secondly to show them that, by working together to build a popular movement, we can do something about it.
The peace movement’s small victories demonstrate that we have more power to challenge U.S. militarism than most Americans realize. As more peace-loving people in the U.S. and across the world discover the power they really have, the second superpower we glimpsed briefly on February 15th, 2003 has the potential to rise stronger, more committed and more determined from the ashes of two decades of war.
A new president like Bernie Sanders in the White House would create a new opening for peace. But as on many domestic issues, that opening will only bear fruit and overcome the opposition of powerful vested interests if there is a mass movement behind it every step of the way. If there is a lesson for peace-loving Americans in the Obama and Trump presidencies, it is that we cannot just walk out of the voting booth and leave it to a champion in the White House to end our wars and bring us peace. In the final analysis, it really is up to us. Please join us!
Feature photo | Protesters gather in Times Square to protest recent U.S. military actions in Iraq, Jan. 4, 2020, in New York. Kevin Hagen | AP
Medea Benjamin is cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, and author of several books, including Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq.


mintpressnews--2020-02-14--Mistrial Declared in Kafkaesque D.C. Trial of Venezuela Embassy Protectors

The word “ Kafkaesque ” is thrown around liberally in the modern era , often without warrant .
“ The Trial , ” a 1925 novel written by Bohemian writer Franz Kafka , tells the story of Josef K. , a man arrested and prosecuted in a nightmarish kangaroo court while unable to properly defend himself .
But nearly 100 years later , another real trial took place in our modern American dystopia , one which easily qualifies for the moniker .
Starting February 11 , four anti-war activists , Adrienne Pine , Kevin Zeese , Margaret Flowers and David @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prison and a $ 100,000 fine each for interfering with the protective function of the State Department .
Today , despite a hostile judge and a host of constraints against the defense , prosecutors were unable to convince a jury that any crime had been committed and the events ended in a mistrial .
The four are members of the Washington D.C. Venezuelan Embassy Protection Collective , a group that last year , at the behest of the government of Nicolas Maduro , entered and occupied the Venezuelan embassy for over a month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sponsored a series of coups against the democratically elected Maduro , bizarrely announcing the virtually unknown politician Juan Guaidó as the legitimate president of the country .
Each coup was less successful than the last , and Maduro remains in complete control of the country , while Guaidó has become an overwhelmingly unpopular figure , jeered and assaulted wherever he goes .
On the news of the mistrial verdict , Howie Hawkins , 2020 Green Party presidential nominee , said “ I am grateful for the resolve of the jurors who held out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shows that the overreach in foreign policy of the Trump Administration is not popular among the American public.
” Flowers and Zeese are members of the Maryland Green Party .
“ We stand with Greens and other progressives everywhere , who are proud of the actions that Flowers , Zeese and the others , in favor of peace and the self-determination of autonomous nations , ” stated Hawkins .
“ This shows that Greens are willing to do whatever is necessary to stand up for justice.
” What made the trial particularly Kafkaesque @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to defend themselves by arguing Maduro is indeed the legitimate leader of the country , Judge Beryl Howell having asserted that President Trump ’ s word on Venezuela is literally law .
The United States instructed Venezuelan diplomats to leave the country last April , prompting the government ’ s request for activists to occupy the building .
Howell also decreed that it was illegal for the defendants to tell the jury that Trump violated international law by raiding the embassy or to question Guaidó ’ s legitimacy at all .
Under the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no defense whatsoever .
Despite the drawbacks , prosecutors could not force through a guilty verdict and the trial ended in a hung jury .
MintPress News spoke with the four activists .
Dr. Pine , an anthropologist at the American University in Washington , D.C. , explained why she decided to prevent the U.S. from violating Venezuelan sovereignty : At the height of the tensions in April , there were more than 70 people defending the embassy from Juan Guaidó ’ s American associates .
Protectors were subject to sound cannons and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Eventually , the government also shut off their power and water .
Kevin Zeese , a lawyer and co-director of Popular Resistance , an alternative news outlet , explained why he refused to leave and had to be removed in handcuffs : The trespass notice that resulted in our arrest was issued because Carlos Vecchio , a fake ambassador working with Juan Guaidó , ordered us to be evicted .
When we got that notice , it was unsigned ; there was no state or government agency ; nothing official on it .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on it saying we were trespassing .
We knew he did not have any position in government and was not really an ambassador .
And we knew we were not trespassing because we had the permission to be in the embassy given to us by the foreign minister and the Maduro government .
So we did not see that as a valid order and we stayed there.
” Pine told us that she and her co-defendants always rejected the validity of the trial and court altogether .
“ We did nothing whatsoever to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flat-out lies , ” she said .
Both Zeese and Pine have contributed to MintPress News in the past .
Alex Rubenstein , a journalist who covered the case in close detail for MintPress last year , spending time inside the embassy told us that , in his opinion , the U.S. had violated the Vienna Treaty , one of the foundations of international diplomacy , saying : Covering the trial from inside the courtroom , The GrayZone ’ s Max Blumenthal expressed his dismay at Judge Howell who “ appeared unable or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S.-recognized doofus , ” Juan Guaidó , “ who controls zero government functions , and the U.N.-recognized Venezuelan government that governs the country both in practice and in law.
” He also reported that during jury selection , one potential juror falsely claimed that Venezuela had run two separate elections – one supervised by Russia and one by the U.S .
He said he learned that by reading the Washington Post .
Therefore , Blumenthal worried , it would not just be the judge that was substandard .
When the jury originally told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reach a verdict she directed them to continue deliberating instead of immediately calling a mistrial .
Howell has called for a retrial , according to Sputnik News , but it is not clear if or when it will occur .
Blumenthal himself is not a neutral actor but also spent time inside the embassy , and was arrested in a SWAT-style raid in October by armed police who had been warned he was potentially armed and dangerous .
He sees the incident as an attempt to silence and intimidate critical media .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media coverage ( or complete lack thereof ) is far more Orwellian .
In the book “ Nineteen-Eighty-Four , ” George Orwell describes a world of groupthink , where the entire political class can change its collective opinion on a dime , consigning unwelcome facts down the memory hole .
Trump ’ s Ministry of Truth has decreed Guaidó to be president , and that is final .
As of Friday afternoon , there has been complete silence across the corporate media spectrum with regards to the trial , with nothing in CNN @ @ @ @ @ @ @ News or MSNBC , who collectively employ hundreds of reporters in the D.C. area .
A search in Google News ’ database finds a few scattered articles in small , alternative outlets like AntiWar.com , Sputnik , and Venezuelanalysis – not coincidentally all sites that have been labeled as spreaders of fake news by the same establishment that has collectively decided to ignore the trial .
The sinister thing about censorship in democracies , Orwell wrote , is that it is largely voluntary , so people don ’ t realize they are under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with entering the embassy at the request of the Maduro administration ?
For Rubenstein , the goal was obvious : Nicolas Maduro won reelection in May 2018 in a process declared free and fair by hundreds of international observers , but a sham by the U.S. government and Western media .
Some sectors of the Venezuelan opposition refused to accept the result , and in January 2019 , Guaidó , a theretofore little-known politician , declared himself president , despite never having stood for the position .
Throughout 2019 , he called on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Despite being supported financially and politically by the U.S. government , each coup attempt failed , and left him in a weaker position than before .
His last coup attempt in November went so poorly that few inside the country even noticed .
Nevertheless , the Trump administration has continued to hold him up as the legitimate president of the country , even as his approval ratings dip below 10 percent .
While the United States and dozens of its allies recognize him , the United Nations and three-quarters of the world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s legitimacy .
Guaidó ’ s mentor Leopoldo Lopez told journalists that if they successfully capture power , they will call on the United States to formally govern the country .
The principal motive behind the U.S. government ’ s opposition to Venezuela is that it has consistently voted for socialist candidates since the days of Hugo Chavez ( in office 1999-2013 ) .
Chavez revolutionized the country , reducing poverty by half and extreme poverty by three-quarters , creating a nationalized healthcare system , ridding the country of illiteracy and drastically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ living .
Since 2015 the United States has been in an official national emergency over the supposed imminent threat Venezuela represents , imposing rounds of increasingly tough sanctions that have helped wreck the once-booming economy .
The sanctions , declared a “ crime against humanity ” by an American U.N. Special Rapporteur who visited the country , are estimated to have killed at least 40,000 people between 2018 and 2019 alone .
The U.N. has called on all member states to break them .
The punitive nature of the sanctions matches the treatment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told MintPress : Feature photo | Left to right , David Paul , Margaret Flowers , Adrienne Pine and Kevin Zeese pose in front of a D.C. court house before deliberations began on Feb. 14 , 2020 .
Photo | Embassy Protection Collective 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

The word “Kafkaesque” is thrown around liberally in the modern era, often without warrant. “The Trial,” a 1925 novel written by Bohemian writer Franz Kafka, tells the story of Josef K., a man arrested and prosecuted in a nightmarish kangaroo court while unable to properly defend himself. But nearly 100 years later, another real trial took place in our modern American dystopia, one which easily qualifies for the moniker. Starting February 11, four anti-war activists, Adrienne Pine, Kevin Zeese, Margaret Flowers and David Paul, were facing a year in prison and a $100,000 fine each for interfering with the protective function of the State Department. Today, despite a hostile judge and a host of constraints against the defense, prosecutors were unable to convince a jury that any crime had been committed and the events ended in a mistrial.
The four are members of the Washington D.C. Venezuelan Embassy Protection Collective, a group that last year, at the behest of the government of Nicolas Maduro, entered and occupied the Venezuelan embassy for over a month. In 2019, the Trump administration sponsored a series of coups against the democratically elected Maduro, bizarrely announcing the virtually unknown politician Juan Guaidó as the legitimate president of the country. Each coup was less successful than the last, and Maduro remains in complete control of the country, while Guaidó has become an overwhelmingly unpopular figure, jeered and assaulted wherever he goes.
On the news of the mistrial verdict, Howie Hawkins, 2020 Green Party presidential nominee, said “I am grateful for the resolve of the jurors who held out and caused today’s hung jury…It shows that the overreach in foreign policy of the Trump Administration is not popular among the American public.” Flowers and Zeese are members of the Maryland Green Party. “We stand with Greens and other progressives everywhere, who are proud of the actions that Flowers, Zeese and the others, in favor of peace and the self-determination of autonomous nations,” stated Hawkins. “This shows that Greens are willing to do whatever is necessary to stand up for justice.”
What made the trial particularly Kafkaesque is that the four were not allowed to defend themselves by arguing Maduro is indeed the legitimate leader of the country, Judge Beryl Howell having asserted that President Trump’s word on Venezuela is literally law. The United States instructed Venezuelan diplomats to leave the country last April, prompting the government’s request for activists to occupy the building. Howell also decreed that it was illegal for the defendants to tell the jury that Trump violated international law by raiding the embassy or to question Guaidó’s legitimacy at all. Under the circumstances, the four decided to present no defense whatsoever. Despite the drawbacks, prosecutors could not force through a guilty verdict and the trial ended in a hung jury.
MintPress News spoke with the four activists. Dr. Pine, an anthropologist at the American University in Washington, D.C., explained why she decided to prevent the U.S. from violating Venezuelan sovereignty:
We entered the embassy at different moments, but all of us shared the goal of protecting it from a U.S.-led coup, and helping to ensure with our presence that a peaceful resolution could be achieved through the negotiation of a Protecting Powers agreement – negotiations that were underway during our residence in the embassy between the democratically elected government of Venezuela and the Trump administration. That is why we were all very clear that our role there was temporary.”
At the height of the tensions in April, there were more than 70 people defending the embassy from Juan Guaidó’s American associates. Protectors were subject to sound cannons and mobs of angry, pro-coup Venezuelans. Eventually, the government also shut off their power and water.
Kevin Zeese, a lawyer and co-director of Popular Resistance, an alternative news outlet, explained why he refused to leave and had to be removed in handcuffs:
The trespass notice that resulted in our arrest was issued because Carlos Vecchio, a fake ambassador working with Juan Guaidó, ordered us to be evicted. When we got that notice, it was unsigned; there was no state or government agency; nothing official on it. But Carlos Vecchio’s name was on it saying we were trespassing. We knew he did not have any position in government and was not really an ambassador. And we knew we were not trespassing because we had the permission to be in the embassy given to us by the foreign minister and the Maduro government. So we did not see that as a valid order and we stayed there.”
Pine told us that she and her co-defendants always rejected the validity of the trial and court altogether. “We did nothing whatsoever to interfere. Their case was riddled with flat-out lies,” she said. Both Zeese and Pine have contributed to MintPress News in the past. Alex Rubenstein, a journalist who covered the case in close detail for MintPress last year, spending time inside the embassy told us that, in his opinion, the U.S. had violated the Vienna Treaty, one of the foundations of international diplomacy, saying:
The United States demonstrated total disregard for the rule of law, all in an effort to further its phony coup against yet another country that has nationalized major sectors of its economy for the benefit of its people instead of big multinational corporations.”
Covering the trial from inside the courtroom, The GrayZone’s Max Blumenthal expressed his dismay at Judge Howell who “appeared unable or unwilling to appreciate the distinction between the U.S.-recognized doofus,” Juan Guaidó, “who controls zero government functions, and the U.N.-recognized Venezuelan government that governs the country both in practice and in law.” He also reported that during jury selection, one potential juror falsely claimed that Venezuela had run two separate elections – one supervised by Russia and one by the U.S. He said he learned that by reading the Washington Post. Therefore, Blumenthal worried, it would not just be the judge that was substandard.
When the jury originally told the judge that they were unable to reach a verdict she directed them to continue deliberating instead of immediately calling a mistrial. Howell has called for a retrial, according to Sputnik News, but it is not clear if or when it will occur.
The judge, Beryl Howell, has stacked the deck against the defendants, preventing the jury from hearing any argument asserting that Maduro is the president of Venezuela, or even that he resides in Miraflores Palace. She asserted that the US president determines who’s prez of VZLA. — Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) February 13, 2020
Blumenthal himself is not a neutral actor but also spent time inside the embassy, and was arrested in a SWAT-style raid in October by armed police who had been warned he was potentially armed and dangerous. He sees the incident as an attempt to silence and intimidate critical media.
Coverage worthy of Orwell
If the trial itself was Kafkaesque, the media coverage (or complete lack thereof) is far more Orwellian. In the book “Nineteen-Eighty-Four,” George Orwell describes a world of groupthink, where the entire political class can change its collective opinion on a dime, consigning unwelcome facts down the memory hole. Trump’s Ministry of Truth has decreed Guaidó to be president, and that is final.
As of Friday afternoon, there has been complete silence across the corporate media spectrum with regards to the trial, with nothing in CNN, the New York Times, Fox News or MSNBC, who collectively employ hundreds of reporters in the D.C. area. A search in Google News’ database finds a few scattered articles in small, alternative outlets like AntiWar.com, Sputnik, and Venezuelanalysis – not coincidentally all sites that have been labeled as spreaders of fake news by the same establishment that has collectively decided to ignore the trial. The sinister thing about censorship in democracies, Orwell wrote, is that it is largely voluntary, so people don’t realize they are under it.
Stemming a socialist wave
Why were the four charged with entering the embassy at the request of the Maduro administration? For Rubenstein, the goal was obvious:
It was to send a clear message to any American citizen who may take up the noble cause of upholding international law or who may be inclined to take a stand against the United States’ long and ugly history of fomenting coup d’états in service of oil or other natural resource interests.”
Nicolas Maduro won reelection in May 2018 in a process declared free and fair by hundreds of international observers, but a sham by the U.S. government and Western media. Some sectors of the Venezuelan opposition refused to accept the result, and in January 2019, Guaidó, a theretofore little-known politician, declared himself president, despite never having stood for the position. Throughout 2019, he called on the military to rebel and overthrow Maduro. Despite being supported financially and politically by the U.S. government, each coup attempt failed, and left him in a weaker position than before. His last coup attempt in November went so poorly that few inside the country even noticed. Nevertheless, the Trump administration has continued to hold him up as the legitimate president of the country, even as his approval ratings dip below 10 percent. While the United States and dozens of its allies recognize him, the United Nations and three-quarters of the world’s countries continue to acknowledge Maduro’s legitimacy. Guaidó’s mentor Leopoldo Lopez told journalists that if they successfully capture power, they will call on the United States to formally govern the country.
The principal motive behind the U.S. government’s opposition to Venezuela is that it has consistently voted for socialist candidates since the days of Hugo Chavez (in office 1999-2013). Chavez revolutionized the country, reducing poverty by half and extreme poverty by three-quarters, creating a nationalized healthcare system, ridding the country of illiteracy and drastically improving economic inequality and the standard of living. Since 2015 the United States has been in an official national emergency over the supposed imminent threat Venezuela represents, imposing rounds of increasingly tough sanctions that have helped wreck the once-booming economy. The sanctions, declared a “crime against humanity” by an American U.N. Special Rapporteur who visited the country, are estimated to have killed at least 40,000 people between 2018 and 2019 alone. The U.N. has called on all member states to break them.
The punitive nature of the sanctions matches the treatment of the Embassy Protection Collective. Pine told MintPress:
We were prosecuted because the Trump administration wants to set an example to terrify others who might consider putting their bodies on the line to protest U.S.-led coups, counterinsurgency programs, unilateral coercive measures, and other imperialist wars and policies, and to stand in solidarity with peoples and nations wishing to forge their own path without U.S. interference around the world.”
Feature photo | Left to right, David Paul, Margaret Flowers, Adrienne Pine and Kevin Zeese pose in front of a D.C. court house before deliberations began on Feb. 14, 2020. Photo | Embassy Protection Collective
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--2020-02-14--NYC Taxpayers Spending Millions on Cyber Center with Controversial Ties to Israeli Intelligence

Early last week , the city of New York launched — with little media scrutiny — one of two new massive cybersecurity centers that will be run by private Israeli firms with close ties to Israel ’ s government , the so-called “ Mega Group ” tied to the Jeffrey Epstein scandal and prominent pro-Israel lobby organizations operating in the United States .
The centers were first announced in 2018 as was the identity of the firms who would run them : Israel-based Jerusalem Venture Partners and SOSA .
As MintPress has reported on several occasions , all three of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spying on the U.S. federal government and/or blackmailing top American politicians , raising concerns regarding why these companies were chosen to run the new centers in the heart of Manhattan .
The news also comes as Israeli cybersecurity companies tied to Israeli military intelligence Unit 8200 were revealed to have access to the U.S. government ’ s most classified systems and simulating the cancellation of the upcoming 2020 presidential election .
The new cybersecurity centers are part of a new New York City public-private partnership called “ CyberNYC ” that is valued at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ spur the creation of 10,000 cybersecurity jobs and make New York City a global leader in cyber innovation.
” CyberNYC is an initiative of New York City ’ s Economic Development Corporation .
However , the companies that will be responsible for creating those cybersecurity jobs will benefit foreign companies , namely Israeli and most of the jobs to be created will go to foreigners as well , as media reports on the partnership have quietly noted .
Those reports also stated that , while the stated purpose of the centers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Israeli firms chosen to run them — Jerusalem Venture Partners ( JVP ) and SOSA — view it as an opportunity to provide Israeli cybersecurity companies with a foothold into the American market and to see Israeli cybersecurity products adopted by both small and medium-sized American businesses , not just large corporations and government agencies .
For example , the founder of JVP and former Knesset member , Erel Margalit , told the Jerusalem Post that “ the center we are setting up [ in New York ] will assist Israeli hi-tech companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the US and around the world.
” More recently , ahead of the opening of the cybersecurity center that Margalit ’ s firm will manage , he told the Times of Israel that “ New York is about something else , it ’ s about the drama of taking investors from Israel and Spain or Paris and other places and taking them to the next business level.
” In other words , the companies set to benefit from these new centers will be foreign and mainly Israeli , as JVP invests the vast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Given that Wilson Lin , the head of CyberNYC , explained the reason behind the initiative as the fact that “ there are not enough well-trained people in cyber security to fill the jobs that are required for a safer , more thriving commercial sector , ” the statements of JVP ’ s founder strongly suggests that those “ well-trained people ” will not be Americans in New York , but will be brought in from abroad , namely Israel ’ s cybersecurity sector .
Of the companies chosen by CyberNYC to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have clear and demonstrable ties to Israel ’ s government and military intelligence as well as controversial groups of pro-Israel donors with considerable political clout in the United States .
For instance , Jerusalem Venture Partners was founded by Erel Margalit in 1993 , with funding from the Yozma Program , an Israeli government program to “ incentivize venture capital investment ” in Israel .
Since then , it has been a driving force in the development of Israel ’ s hi-tech sector and regularly collaborates with the Israeli Ministry of Economy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Innovation Support Program ) alumni organization of Unit 8200 .
Today , it is the second largest venture capital fund in Israel .
JVP was also the sole venture capital fund chosen to partner with Israel ’ s government and military to establish the public-private “ cyber hub ” in Beersheba .
This “ hub ” not only houses the IDF ’ s technology campus , but also the Israel National Cyber Directorate , which reports directly to Israel ’ s Prime Minister , as well as a high-tech corporate park that mostly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s military intelligence apparatus .
The area has been cited in several media reports as a visible indicator of the public-private merger between Israeli technology companies , many of them started by Unit 8200 alumni , and the Israeli government and its intelligence services .
In addition to JVP ’ s close ties to Israel ’ s government and its key role in the merging of Israel ’ s private cybersecurity sector with Israeli military intelligence , JVP also has close ties to the Bronfman family through its Chief Operating Officer and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to working with JVP , Darmon worked for Claridge Israel , the investment arm of the Bronfman family that was founded by Charles Bronfman in 1987 .
Charles Bronfman was a one-time business partner of Mossad agent Robert Maxwell , father of Jeffrey Epstein ’ s alleged madam Ghislaine Maxwell , and co-founded the “ Mega Group ” , a group of pro-Israel oligarchs with clear and direct ties to organized crime , alongside Leslie Wexner , the main financier of Jeffrey Epstein ’ s operation that involved the sex trafficking of minors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SOSA was founded much more recently than JVP , yet also has close ties to Israel ’ s government and military .
Created in 2014 , SOSA has grown rapidly by connecting mostly Israeli start-ups with investors and through its partnerships with the IDF .
This partnership first became clear in 2018 , when SOSA created the Homeland Security ( HLST ) Innovation Hub , which the Times of Israel described as “ a first of its kind program that aims to create a defense and security innovation community that will match homeland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to help industry giants maintain their leading edge.
” Last year , SOSA became one of two companies to manage the Israeli Ministry of Defense ’ s program INNOFENSE , an innovation program for civilian tech start-ups in the country ’ s defense industry .
SOSA ’ s collaboration with the IDF also involves the creation of “ joint business activities between international companies , [ government ] security organizations , investors and startups , ” making SOSA a key player in the blurring of the line between Israeli military intelligence and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also directly partnered with two of Israel ’ s top weapons manufacturers , Rafael Advanced Defense Systems , as well as defense electronics companies ELTA Systems and Elron Electronics , the former parent company of another Israeli weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems .
It is also partnered with the Unit 8200 alumni-founded tech company CheckPoint Systems and Leumi Tech , the hi-tech subsidiary of one of Israel ’ s largest banks , Leumi .
Leumi Tech exists only in the U.S. and specifically aims to “ provide a comprehensive suite of products and services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US.
” The bank was recently forced to pay $ 400 million to the U.S. government for assisting U.S. citizens , most of them dual U.S.-Israeli citizens , in preparing false tax returns and hiding their assets in offshore accounts .
SOSA ’ s General Manager Guy Franklin is of particular interest , due to his close ties to the Israeli American Council ( IAC ) , a pro-Israel lobby group created by convicted felon and ultra-Zionist millionaire Adam Milstein and largely funded by Sheldon and Miriam Adelson .
The Adelsons are also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the Republican Party in the United States .
Of the $ 100 million in funding for the CyberNYC initiative , $ 30 million comes from New York taxpayers and the remaining funds coming from the program ’ s partners , which includes Goldman Sachs and the Israeli military intelligence Unit 8200 incubator Team8 , a start-up accelerator which has been discussed at length in several past MintPress News reports , including the recent MintPress investigation into the Israeli company Cybereason — a partner of Team8 .
Team8 , particularly its presence in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the push by pro-Israel political donor and American hedge fund manager Paul Singer and Israel ’ s government to make Israel the global cybersecurity leader as a means of preventing countries from boycotting Israel over human rights violations and war crimes .
Team8 ’ s role in CyberNYC will see them not only finance part of the initiative but also training cybersecurity workers who will be hired as part of the partnership .
Singer , who is based in Manhattan , created Start Up Nation Central in 2012 to specifically outsource American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top AIPAC officials and Israel ’ s government .
Meanwhile , in parallel , Israel ’ s government and intelligence apparatus began a policy that same year that involved outsourcing intelligence and military intelligence operations to private companies created for that very purpose , particularly in the field of cybersecurity .
Thus , much as Israel ’ s cybersecurity industry has long been fused to Israel ’ s military and intelligence apparati , the Paul Singer-funded and Israel-backed policy has openly sought to bring American companies and government agencies into the fold in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Though the so-called “ anti-BDS laws ” that have been passed in several U.S. states are one facet of this push , the use of Israeli tech , namely cybersecurity , sector to pursue this same end has received decidedly less coverage .
New York City has long been a major focus on this policy , with the growth of Israel hi-tech start-ups present in New York and run by former members of Unit 8200 exploding since this policy officially began in 2012 .
Indeed , Haaretz noted that , between 2013 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tech start-ups in New York City grew by fivefold and the number of Unit 8200 alumni working in NYC tech start-ups has also spiked in that same time frame .
The number of Unit 8200 alumni working in NYC ’ s tech sector has grown so much that they host an annual gala closed to the press where the goal , per Haaretz , is “ to try to connect startups and early stage entrepreneurs from 8200 EISP ( the Israeli accelerator for Unit 8200 alumni ) with clients and venture capital funds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the main players at that gala is Guy Franklin , the CEO of SOSA , which was chosen to run the other NYC cybersecurity sector .
The decision to create expensive , new cybersecurity centers run by JVP and SOSA , two Israeli firms with clear ties to controversial pro-Israel lobby organization and donors as well as Israel ’ s government and intelligence apparatus , reveals that not only is this Singer and Israel-backed policy continuing to develop and expand at a rapid pace , but now the money of New York City @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it to new heights even though that very policy benefits Israel ’ s economy at the U.S. ’ expense .
Whitney Webb is a MintPress News journalist based in Chile .
She has contributed to several independent media outlets including Global Research , EcoWatch , the Ron Paul Institute and 21st Century Wire , among others .
She has made several radio and television appearances and is the 2019 winner of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in Journalism .

Early last week, the city of New York launched — with little media scrutiny — one of two new massive cybersecurity centers that will be run by private Israeli firms with close ties to Israel’s government, the so-called “Mega Group” tied to the Jeffrey Epstein scandal and prominent pro-Israel lobby organizations operating in the United States. The centers were first announced in 2018 as was the identity of the firms who would run them: Israel-based Jerusalem Venture Partners and SOSA.
As MintPress has reported on several occasions, all three of these entities have a history of aggressively spying on the U.S. federal government and/or blackmailing top American politicians, raising concerns regarding why these companies were chosen to run the new centers in the heart of Manhattan. The news also comes as Israeli cybersecurity companies tied to Israeli military intelligence Unit 8200 were revealed to have access to the U.S. government’s most classified systems and simulating the cancellation of the upcoming 2020 presidential election.
The new cybersecurity centers are part of a new New York City public-private partnership called “CyberNYC” that is valued at over $100 million and officially aims to “spur the creation of 10,000 cybersecurity jobs and make New York City a global leader in cyber innovation.” CyberNYC is an initiative of New York City’s Economic Development Corporation.
However, the companies that will be responsible for creating those cybersecurity jobs will benefit foreign companies, namely Israeli and most of the jobs to be created will go to foreigners as well, as media reports on the partnership have quietly noted. Those reports also stated that, while the stated purpose of the centers is to create new jobs, the Israeli firms chosen to run them — Jerusalem Venture Partners (JVP) and SOSA — view it as an opportunity to provide Israeli cybersecurity companies with a foothold into the American market and to see Israeli cybersecurity products adopted by both small and medium-sized American businesses, not just large corporations and government agencies.
For example, the founder of JVP and former Knesset member, Erel Margalit, told the Jerusalem Post that “the center we are setting up [in New York] will assist Israeli hi-tech companies in collaborating with customers and companies in the US and around the world.” More recently, ahead of the opening of the cybersecurity center that Margalit’s firm will manage, he told the Times of Israel that “New York is about something else, it’s about the drama of taking investors from Israel and Spain or Paris and other places and taking them to the next business level.” In other words, the companies set to benefit from these new centers will be foreign and mainly Israeli, as JVP invests the vast majority of its funds in Israeli start-ups.
Given that Wilson Lin, the head of CyberNYC, explained the reason behind the initiative as the fact that “there are not enough well-trained people in cyber security to fill the jobs that are required for a safer, more thriving commercial sector,” the statements of JVP’s founder strongly suggests that those “well-trained people” will not be Americans in New York, but will be brought in from abroad, namely Israel’s cybersecurity sector.
Of the companies chosen by CyberNYC to run its new cybersecurity centers, both have clear and demonstrable ties to Israel’s government and military intelligence as well as controversial groups of pro-Israel donors with considerable political clout in the United States.
For instance, Jerusalem Venture Partners was founded by Erel Margalit in 1993, with funding from the Yozma Program, an Israeli government program to “incentivize venture capital investment” in Israel. Since then, it has been a driving force in the development of Israel’s hi-tech sector and regularly collaborates with the Israeli Ministry of Economy and Industry and the EISP (Entrepreneurship and Innovation Support Program) alumni organization of Unit 8200. Today, it is the second largest venture capital fund in Israel.
JVP was also the sole venture capital fund chosen to partner with Israel’s government and military to establish the public-private “cyber hub” in Beersheba. This “hub” not only houses the IDF’s technology campus, but also the Israel National Cyber Directorate, which reports directly to Israel’s Prime Minister, as well as a high-tech corporate park that mostly houses tech companies with ties to Israel’s military intelligence apparatus. The area has been cited in several media reports as a visible indicator of the public-private merger between Israeli technology companies, many of them started by Unit 8200 alumni, and the Israeli government and its intelligence services.
In addition to JVP’s close ties to Israel’s government and its key role in the merging of Israel’s private cybersecurity sector with Israeli military intelligence, JVP also has close ties to the Bronfman family through its Chief Operating Officer and general partner, Fiona Darmon. Prior to working with JVP, Darmon worked for Claridge Israel, the investment arm of the Bronfman family that was founded by Charles Bronfman in 1987.
Charles Bronfman was a one-time business partner of Mossad agent Robert Maxwell, father of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged madam Ghislaine Maxwell, and co-founded the “Mega Group”, a group of pro-Israel oligarchs with clear and direct ties to organized crime, alongside Leslie Wexner, the main financier of Jeffrey Epstein’s operation that involved the sex trafficking of minors on behalf of Israeli military intelligence.
SOSA was founded much more recently than JVP, yet also has close ties to Israel’s government and military. Created in 2014, SOSA has grown rapidly by connecting mostly Israeli start-ups with investors and through its partnerships with the IDF. This partnership first became clear in 2018, when SOSA created the Homeland Security (HLST) Innovation Hub, which the Times of Israel described as “a first of its kind program that aims to create a defense and security innovation community that will match homeland security and defense industry firms with startups, to help industry giants maintain their leading edge.”
Last year, SOSA became one of two companies to manage the Israeli Ministry of Defense’s program INNOFENSE, an innovation program for civilian tech start-ups in the country’s defense industry. SOSA’s collaboration with the IDF also involves the creation of “joint business activities between international companies, [government] security organizations, investors and startups,” making SOSA a key player in the blurring of the line between Israeli military intelligence and its private tech sector.
SOSA is also directly partnered with two of Israel’s top weapons manufacturers, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, as well as defense electronics companies ELTA Systems and Elron Electronics, the former parent company of another Israeli weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems. It is also partnered with the Unit 8200 alumni-founded tech company CheckPoint Systems and Leumi Tech, the hi-tech subsidiary of one of Israel’s largest banks, Leumi. Leumi Tech exists only in the U.S. and specifically aims to “provide a comprehensive suite of products and services to Israeli high-tech companies operating in the US.” The bank was recently forced to pay $400 million to the U.S. government for assisting U.S. citizens, most of them dual U.S.-Israeli citizens, in preparing false tax returns and hiding their assets in offshore accounts.
SOSA’s General Manager Guy Franklin is of particular interest, due to his close ties to the Israeli American Council (IAC), a pro-Israel lobby group created by convicted felon and ultra-Zionist millionaire Adam Milstein and largely funded by Sheldon and Miriam Adelson. The Adelsons are also the largest donors to both President Trump and the Republican Party in the United States.
Of the $100 million in funding for the CyberNYC initiative, $30 million comes from New York taxpayers and the remaining funds coming from the program’s partners, which includes Goldman Sachs and the Israeli military intelligence Unit 8200 incubator Team8, a start-up accelerator which has been discussed at length in several past MintPress News reports, including the recent MintPress investigation into the Israeli company Cybereason — a partner of Team8.
Team8, particularly its presence in New York, has long been associated with the push by pro-Israel political donor and American hedge fund manager Paul Singer and Israel’s government to make Israel the global cybersecurity leader as a means of preventing countries from boycotting Israel over human rights violations and war crimes. Team8’s role in CyberNYC will see them not only finance part of the initiative but also training cybersecurity workers who will be hired as part of the partnership.
Singer, who is based in Manhattan, created Start Up Nation Central in 2012 to specifically outsource American tech jobs to Israel in collaboration with top AIPAC officials and Israel’s government. Meanwhile, in parallel, Israel’s government and intelligence apparatus began a policy that same year that involved outsourcing intelligence and military intelligence operations to private companies created for that very purpose, particularly in the field of cybersecurity.
Thus, much as Israel’s cybersecurity industry has long been fused to Israel’s military and intelligence apparati, the Paul Singer-funded and Israel-backed policy has openly sought to bring American companies and government agencies into the fold in order to prevent boycotts of Israel. Though the so-called “anti-BDS laws” that have been passed in several U.S. states are one facet of this push, the use of Israeli tech, namely cybersecurity, sector to pursue this same end has received decidedly less coverage.
New York City has long been a major focus on this policy, with the growth of Israel hi-tech start-ups present in New York and run by former members of Unit 8200 exploding since this policy officially began in 2012. Indeed, Haaretz noted that, between 2013 and 2017 alone, the number of Israeli tech start-ups in New York City grew by fivefold and the number of Unit 8200 alumni working in NYC tech start-ups has also spiked in that same time frame.
The number of Unit 8200 alumni working in NYC’s tech sector has grown so much that they host an annual gala closed to the press where the goal, per Haaretz, is “to try to connect startups and early stage entrepreneurs from 8200 EISP (the Israeli accelerator for Unit 8200 alumni) with clients and venture capital funds in the United States.” One of the main players at that gala is Guy Franklin, the CEO of SOSA, which was chosen to run the other NYC cybersecurity sector.
The decision to create expensive, new cybersecurity centers run by JVP and SOSA, two Israeli firms with clear ties to controversial pro-Israel lobby organization and donors as well as Israel’s government and intelligence apparatus, reveals that not only is this Singer and Israel-backed policy continuing to develop and expand at a rapid pace, but now the money of New York City taxpayers is now being used to propel it to new heights even though that very policy benefits Israel’s economy at the U.S.’ expense.
Feature photo | Graphic by Claudio Cabrera
Whitney Webb is a MintPress News journalist based in Chile. She has contributed to several independent media outlets including Global Research, EcoWatch, the Ron Paul Institute and 21st Century Wire, among others. She has made several radio and television appearances and is the 2019 winner of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in Journalism.


mintpressnews--2020-02-14--Coronavirus: Media and Politicians Take Anti-China Fear Mongering to New Levels

Starting in Wuhan in December , the coronavirus outbreak has spread across China , infecting around 64,000 people and worrying the rest of the world .
Fueling the panic , media have been printing alarmist scare stories and politicians peddling false information .
One prominent example of this is Arkansas senator Tom Cotton , who claimed that the virus was actually developed by the Chinese government .
Wuhan , he stated , “ has China ’ s only biosafety level-four super laboratory that works with the world ’ s most deadly pathogens to include , yes , coronavirus.
” He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worse than Chernobyl , ” referring to the 1986 nuclear meltdown in Ukraine .
“ The Wuhan coronavirus is a catastrophe on the scale of Chernobyl for China , only Chernobyl was localized .
The coronavirus is spreading worldwide , ” he said , adding that in one day “ confirmed cases increased in China by 30 percent .
The true numbers are likely much higher.
” Cotton ’ s remarks were condemned as unhelpful , at best , and dangerously alarmist fake news , at worse by health authorities .
Experts have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus to debunk his super laboratory conspiracy theories .
On the supposed huge increase in cases , Dr. Michael Ryan , the head of the World Health Organization ’ s ( W.H.O . )
health emergencies program , said there was a far more mundane explanation for the change in numbers ; “ This increase that you ’ ve all seen in the last 24 hours is largely down to a change in how the cases are being reported , ” he told media .
The Chinese government has also expressed its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ It ’ s very harmful , it ’ s very dangerous to stir up suspicion , rumors and spread them among the people .
For one thing , this will create panic .
Another thing , that it will fan up racial discrimination , xenophobia , all these things that will really harm our joint efforts to combat the virus , ” said Cui Tiankai , China ’ s ambassador to the United States .
“ Of course , there are all kinds of speculation and rumors… How can we believe all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Western media have continually scorned China for its handling of the crisis .
The BBC claimed that “ Chinese authorities are trying hard to control the narrative ” and asked , “ can we trust the numbers ” from the government .
But in reality , the W.H.O .
has exalted China as a model of openness and dedication to eradicating the virus , sharing as much genetic and logistical information as possible with partners and organizations .
It also managed the Herculean task of building two huge hospitals to house patients @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ryan stated that he and the W.H.O .
Director General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus had , “ never seen the scale of the commitment of an epidemic response at this level…The challenge is great but the response has been massive and the Chinese government deserves huge credit , ” personally thanking them for their unparalleled effort .
Despite this , the U.S. government has declared itself “ disappointed ” with China ’ s supposed defensiveness .
“ We thought there was better transparency coming out of China , but it doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic advisor Larry Kudlow said .
The W.H.O .
did make some strong criticisms regarding the outbreak .
However , these were reserved for the media , the organization declaring that alongside the medical global emergency , there was also a “ massive ‘ infodemic ’ – an overabundance of information – some accurate and some not – that makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable guidance when they need it.
” As the virus has spread , so has anti-Chinese racism .
In a similar fashion to how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , news of the coronavirus has led to an outbreak of anti-Chinese sentiment across the West , with Chinese restaurants in Europe experiencing decreased business and people of Chinese ancestry all over the world reporting an upsurge in xenophobic and bigoted comments leveled at them .
MintPress reported on the phenomenon last month .
As of Friday , there have been 64,435 confirmed cases in 25 countries , resulting in 1,383 deaths , all but two in China .
This means that only two percent of those who have contracted the virus have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for concern for health authorities , it pales in comparison to other , more mundane illnesses .
For example , the U.S. government estimates that during the winter of 2017-8 , over 800,000 Americans were hospitalized with influenza , with 61,000 deaths .
Reminiscent of the coverage of the SARS outbreak in 2003 or 2014 Ebola virus , media and politicians have hyped up the threat levels of a foreign virus for their own ends , creating pandemics of fear and xenophobia to accompany the real but limited medical outbreaks .
The coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scaremongering that has come with it .
Feature photo | A person is checked with a thermal imaging camera as precautionary measures against the spreading of novel coronavirus , at Budapest Liszt Ferenc International Airport in Budapest , Hungary , Feb. 5 , 2020 .
Zoltan Balogh | MTI via 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

Starting in Wuhan in December, the coronavirus outbreak has spread across China, infecting around 64,000 people and worrying the rest of the world. Fueling the panic, media have been printing alarmist scare stories and politicians peddling false information.
One prominent example of this is Arkansas senator Tom Cotton, who claimed that the virus was actually developed by the Chinese government. Wuhan, he stated, “has China’s only biosafety level-four super laboratory that works with the world’s most deadly pathogens to include, yes, coronavirus.” He also claimed that the outbreak is “worse than Chernobyl,” referring to the 1986 nuclear meltdown in Ukraine. “The Wuhan coronavirus is a catastrophe on the scale of Chernobyl for China, only Chernobyl was localized. The coronavirus is spreading worldwide,” he said, adding that in one day “confirmed cases increased in China by 30 percent. The true numbers are likely much higher.”
Cotton’s remarks were condemned as unhelpful, at best, and dangerously alarmist fake news, at worse by health authorities. Experts have had to take time off from fighting the virus to debunk his super laboratory conspiracy theories. On the supposed huge increase in cases, Dr. Michael Ryan, the head of the World Health Organization’s (W.H.O.) health emergencies program, said there was a far more mundane explanation for the change in numbers; “This increase that you’ve all seen in the last 24 hours is largely down to a change in how the cases are being reported,” he told media.
The Chinese government has also expressed its consternation at Cotton’s views. “It’s very harmful, it’s very dangerous to stir up suspicion, rumors and spread them among the people. For one thing, this will create panic. Another thing, that it will fan up racial discrimination, xenophobia, all these things that will really harm our joint efforts to combat the virus,” said Cui Tiankai, China’s ambassador to the United States. “Of course, there are all kinds of speculation and rumors… How can we believe all these crazy things?” he added.
Western media have continually scorned China for its handling of the crisis. The BBC claimed that “Chinese authorities are trying hard to control the narrative” and asked, “can we trust the numbers” from the government. But in reality, the W.H.O. has exalted China as a model of openness and dedication to eradicating the virus, sharing as much genetic and logistical information as possible with partners and organizations. It also managed the Herculean task of building two huge hospitals to house patients in a matter of days. Dr. Ryan stated that he and the W.H.O. Director General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus had, “never seen the scale of the commitment of an epidemic response at this level…The challenge is great but the response has been massive and the Chinese government deserves huge credit,” personally thanking them for their unparalleled effort.
Despite this, the U.S. government has declared itself “disappointed” with China’s supposed defensiveness. “We thought there was better transparency coming out of China, but it doesn’t appear to be,” White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow said.
While #China's dealing with the #coronavirus, some US politicians and mainstream media manipulate things for their own benefit @dancohen3000 pic.twitter.com/RP5GzJ3g7b — The Alternative World (@TheAltWorld) February 13, 2020
The W.H.O. did make some strong criticisms regarding the outbreak. However, these were reserved for the media, the organization declaring that alongside the medical global emergency, there was also a “massive ‘infodemic’ – an overabundance of information – some accurate and some not – that makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable guidance when they need it.”
As the virus has spread, so has anti-Chinese racism. In a similar fashion to how Ebola was racialized as an African plague, news of the coronavirus has led to an outbreak of anti-Chinese sentiment across the West, with Chinese restaurants in Europe experiencing decreased business and people of Chinese ancestry all over the world reporting an upsurge in xenophobic and bigoted comments leveled at them. MintPress reported on the phenomenon last month.
Chinese people don't attend rallies, they "descend" upon them Corrupt Chinese officials don't get convicted for corruption, they "lose power struggles" China doesn't punish corrupt officials, they "net" them Chinese media doesn't report news, it reports "propaganda" — Maitreya Bhakal (@MaitreyaBhakal) February 13, 2020
As of Friday, there have been 64,435 confirmed cases in 25 countries, resulting in 1,383 deaths, all but two in China. This means that only two percent of those who have contracted the virus have died. While certainly a serious cause for concern for health authorities, it pales in comparison to other, more mundane illnesses. For example, the U.S. government estimates that during the winter of 2017-8, over 800,000 Americans were hospitalized with influenza, with 61,000 deaths.
Reminiscent of the coverage of the SARS outbreak in 2003 or 2014 Ebola virus, media and politicians have hyped up the threat levels of a foreign virus for their own ends, creating pandemics of fear and xenophobia to accompany the real but limited medical outbreaks. The coronavirus is serious enough without the pandemic of scaremongering that has come with it.
Feature photo | A person is checked with a thermal imaging camera as precautionary measures against the spreading of novel coronavirus, at Budapest Liszt Ferenc International Airport in Budapest, Hungary, Feb. 5, 2020. Zoltan Balogh | MTI via 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--2020-02-14--Citing Hostile “Bernie Bros” Shadowy Group Launches Beat Bernie 2020 PAC

A shadowy new PAC calling themselves the “ Beat Bernie 2020 ” movement has launched what it calls a “ massive grassroots fundraising haul ” among citizens concerned that “ Bernie Sanders is creating irreparable division on the left that will create significant difficulties for the Party ’ s eventual nominee.
” The PAC claims that the Vermont senator is creating a “ with us or against us ” attitude , complaining there is now “ no grey area in between to have a real dialogue , ” – a strange complaint given that its only stated goal is to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ PAC alleges that Bernie has “ no real explanation for how he will implement any of his proposed changes ” and “ he doesn ’ t actually know what he ’ s doing.
” The group claims that their motives are purely in good faith : “ Democrats need to unite against Donald Trump , ” it stated in a press release , arguing that the candidate must not be Sanders , as nearly half his supporters will not commit to voting blue no matter who .
But if beating Trump was their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be to rally around Sanders as leader as losing that much support would doom the party to failure in November .
Bernie has also built up a huge base of support from several key constituencies , winning the black , Hispanic , white working-class , poor , unionized , youth and independent vote in New Hampshire – a coalition diverse enough to carry the day against Trump .
Indeed , virtually the only groups he has failed to win over are rich , older professionals , groups that tend to vote Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 is insisting on keeping its members ’ and donors ’ identities a secret , due to what they call “ a credible fear of threats and backlash from ardent Bernie supporters , a tactic they have become infamous for using ruthlessly on social media , especially Twitter.
” They claim : Sharing any kind of criticism about Sanders is almost always met with intense harassment ad bullying from Bernie-backing trolls , often with sexist and racist undertones…This is the same level of fear many Democrats feel when interacting with Trump supporters in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t directly responsible for the actions of his supporters , he also hasn ’ t taken a serious effort to condemn this behavior .
Sanders is the overwhelming frontrunner for the nomination .
After winning the popular vote in Iowa and New Hampshire , he has taken a ten-point lead in a national poll released yesterday by Morning Consultant .
His closest challenger , Joe Biden , finished a lackluster fourth and fifth in the first two states and has failed to bag any delegates so far .
Biden has also chosen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fourth state , South Carolina .
Multibillionaire former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg is eleven points behind but has not even begun contesting states .
Sanders ’ main rival so far , former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg , sits on only eleven percent support nationally , around a third of Bernie ’ s numbers .
He also polls barely above zero among non-whites , a problem going into the diverse states of Nevada and South Carolina .
The charge that “ Bernie Bros ” are uniquely toxic is not borne out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton supporters to be twice as aggressive and angry online as Sanders followers , who were among the most friendly or meek .
The news that Sanders is now the favorite in all fifty states has many Washington insiders seriously rattled .
“ If Bernie Sanders looks like he ’ s running away with it , for the Democratic establishment that ’ s almost as scary as losing to Donald Trump , ” said MSNBC Morning Joe host Willie Geist .
His colleague Joe Scarborough explained that the Democrats could look to Mike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ It may not be to get the 50 percent ” of delegates , he said .
“ It may just be to stop Bernie and open the door for somebody else.
” There is very little information as to what the group intends to do or how it will attempt to block a Bernie takeover of the Democratic Party .
Visiting the campaign ’ s website , there is nothing except a large donate button and a short message claiming that he has become “ one of our nation ’ s most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ army of online supporters who threaten , insult , and bully ” anyone who dares question him .
The anonymous “ grassroots ” campaign is strongly reminiscent of the organization Prop Or Not , which claimed to be a grassroots campaign of experts who were concerned about Russian propaganda and fake news but was likely the brainchild of CNN National Security Specialist Michael Weiss , who used it to defame alternative media organizations .
Is Beat Bernie 2020 a genuine grassroots movement or a fake astroturf organization designed at defending the power and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is a clever grift to siphon donations from rich moderates worried about a socialist president ?
One thing is clear : if Sanders continues to rise , the establishment will become increasingly nervous about the prospect of seeing the 78-year-old socialist in the White House .
Feature photo | Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders , I-Vt. , waits to be announced at a campaign stop at the Whittemore Center Arena at the University of New Hampshire , Feb. 10 , 2020 , in Durham , N.H. Andrew Harnik | AP Alan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

A shadowy new PAC calling themselves the “Beat Bernie 2020” movement has launched what it calls a “massive grassroots fundraising haul” among citizens concerned that “Bernie Sanders is creating irreparable division on the left that will create significant difficulties for the Party’s eventual nominee.” The PAC claims that the Vermont senator is creating a “with us or against us” attitude, complaining there is now “no grey area in between to have a real dialogue,” – a strange complaint given that its only stated goal is to unequivocally prevent a Sanders nomination. The PAC alleges that Bernie has “no real explanation for how he will implement any of his proposed changes” and “he doesn’t actually know what he’s doing.”
The group claims that their motives are purely in good faith: “Democrats need to unite against Donald Trump,” it stated in a press release, arguing that the candidate must not be Sanders, as nearly half his supporters will not commit to voting blue no matter who. But if beating Trump was their only goal, then the obvious response would be to rally around Sanders as leader as losing that much support would doom the party to failure in November. Bernie has also built up a huge base of support from several key constituencies, winning the black, Hispanic, white working-class, poor, unionized, youth and independent vote in New Hampshire – a coalition diverse enough to carry the day against Trump. Indeed, virtually the only groups he has failed to win over are rich, older professionals, groups that tend to vote Republican in the general election.
So an anonymous bloc of Democratic Party donors is launching a PAC specifically designed to stop Bernie Sanders and saying it won’t release its funding sources because Sanders supporters are too mean online? Looks like the establishment has officially entered full freakout mode. pic.twitter.com/oIgKlsETOb — Miles Kampf-Lassin (@MilesKLassin) February 12, 2020
Beat Bernie 2020 is insisting on keeping its members’ and donors’ identities a secret, due to what they call “a credible fear of threats and backlash from ardent Bernie supporters, a tactic they have become infamous for using ruthlessly on social media, especially Twitter.” They claim:
Sharing any kind of criticism about Sanders is almost always met with intense harassment ad bullying from Bernie-backing trolls, often with sexist and racist undertones…This is the same level of fear many Democrats feel when interacting with Trump supporters in MAGA hats, and while Bernie isn’t directly responsible for the actions of his supporters, he also hasn’t taken a serious effort to condemn this behavior.
Sanders is the overwhelming frontrunner for the nomination. After winning the popular vote in Iowa and New Hampshire, he has taken a ten-point lead in a national poll released yesterday by Morning Consultant. His closest challenger, Joe Biden, finished a lackluster fourth and fifth in the first two states and has failed to bag any delegates so far. Biden has also chosen to skip Nevada altogether and concentrate on the fourth state, South Carolina. Multibillionaire former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg is eleven points behind but has not even begun contesting states. Sanders’ main rival so far, former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg, sits on only eleven percent support nationally, around a third of Bernie’s numbers. He also polls barely above zero among non-whites, a problem going into the diverse states of Nevada and South Carolina. The charge that “Bernie Bros” are uniquely toxic is not borne out by a 2016 survey, which found Clinton supporters to be twice as aggressive and angry online as Sanders followers, who were among the most friendly or meek.
Which candidate or candidates are you considering voting for in the Dem primary or caucus in your state in 2020?
Sanders 45%
Biden 42%
Warren 40%
Buttigieg 35%
Bloomberg 32%
Klobuchar 21%
Steyer 11%
Gabbard 6%@YouGovUS/@TheEconomist, Dem Primary Voters,https://t.co/7GjclsIbRF — Political Polls (@Politics_Polls) February 13, 2020
The news that Sanders is now the favorite in all fifty states has many Washington insiders seriously rattled. “If Bernie Sanders looks like he’s running away with it, for the Democratic establishment that’s almost as scary as losing to Donald Trump,” said MSNBC Morning Joe host Willie Geist. His colleague Joe Scarborough explained that the Democrats could look to Mike Bloomberg as their “political savior.” “It may not be to get the 50 percent” of delegates, he said. “It may just be to stop Bernie and open the door for somebody else.”
There is very little information as to what the group intends to do or how it will attempt to block a Bernie takeover of the Democratic Party. Visiting the campaign’s website, there is nothing except a large donate button and a short message claiming that he has become “one of our nation’s most divisive figures” leading a “rogue army of online supporters who threaten, insult, and bully” anyone who dares question him.
The anonymous “grassroots” campaign is strongly reminiscent of the organization Prop Or Not, which claimed to be a grassroots campaign of experts who were concerned about Russian propaganda and fake news but was likely the brainchild of CNN National Security Specialist Michael Weiss, who used it to defame alternative media organizations. Is Beat Bernie 2020 a genuine grassroots movement or a fake astroturf organization designed at defending the power and influence of the elite? Or perhaps it is a clever grift to siphon donations from rich moderates worried about a socialist president? One thing is clear: if Sanders continues to rise, the establishment will become increasingly nervous about the prospect of seeing the 78-year-old socialist in the White House.
Feature photo | Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., waits to be announced at a campaign stop at the Whittemore Center Arena at the University of New Hampshire, Feb. 10, 2020, in Durham, N.H. Andrew Harnik | 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.