U. S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson recently admitted that America’s official foreign policy includes a regime-change operation in Iran. The CIA has created an office for this sole purpose, tasking Michael D’Andrea – also known as the Dark Prince or Ayatollah Mike – with leading this operation. Iran just had an election in May, and voter turnout was as high as 70 percent. Even prisoners were allowed to vote, something so-called moderate democratic countries like New Zealand disallow. In contrast, voter turnout in the 2016 U. S. elections was around 58 percent, and support for Donald Trump’s impeachment is now higher than support for his presidency. Though Iran is hardly democratic by Western standards given the stringent requirements for becoming a political candidate in the first place, it is still vastly more democratic than most of America’s closest allies in the region. According to a U. S. State Department document: ‘The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a monarchy ruled by the Al Saud family… The following significant human rights problems were reported: no right to change the government peacefully; torture and physical abuse; poor prison and detention center conditions; arbitrary arrest and incommunicado detention; denial of fair and public trials and lack of due process in the judicial system; political prisoners; restrictions on civil liberties such as freedoms of speech (including the Internet), assembly, association, movement, and severe restrictions on religious freedom; and corruption and lack of government transparency. Violence against women and a lack of equal rights for women, violations of the rights of children, trafficking in persons, and discrimination on the basis of gender, religion, sect, and ethnicity were common. The lack of workers’ rights, including the employment sponsorship system, remained a severe problem.’ [emphasis added]
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jun 21, 2017.
New revelations from Wikileaks’ ‘Vault 7′ leak shed a disturbing light on the safeguarding of privacy. Something already known and largely suspected has now become documented by Wikileaks. It seems evident that the CIA is now a state within a state, an entity out of control that has even arrived at the point of creating its own hacking network in order to avoid the scrutiny of the NSA and other agencies. Reading the revelations contained in the documents released by WikiLeaks and adding them to those already presented in recent years by Snowden, it now seems evident that the technological aspect regarding espionage is a specialty in which the CIA, as far as we know, excels. Hardware and software vendors that are complicit – most of which are American, British or Israeli – give the CIA the opportunity to achieve informational full-spectrum dominance, relegating privacy to extinction. Such a convergence of power, money and technology entails major conflicts of interest, as can be seen in the case of Amazon AWS (Amazon’s Cloud Service), cloud provider for the CIA, whose owner, Jeff Bezos, is also the owner of The Washington Post. It is a clear overlap of private interests that conflicts with the theoretical need to declare uncomfortable truths without the need to consider orders numbering in the millions of dollars from clients like the CIA. While it is just one example, there are thousands more out there. The perverse interplay between media, spy agencies and politicians has compromised the very meaning of the much vaunted democracy of the land of the Stars and Stripes. The constant scandals that are beamed onto our screens now serve the sole purpose of advancing the deep interest of the Washington establishment. In geopolitical terms, it is now more than obvious that the deep state has committed all available means toward sabotaging any dialogue and dtente between the United States and Russia. In terms of news, the Wikileaks revelations shed light on the methods used by US intelligence agencies like the CIA to place blame on the Kremlin, or networks associated with it, for the hacking that occurred during the American elections.
The massive WikiLeaks Vault 7 release is an extremely important public service. It’s hard to find anyone not concerned by a secret CIA hacking program targeting virtually the whole planet – using malware capable of bypassing encryption protection on any device from iOS to Android, and from Windows to Samsung TVs. In a series of tweets, Edward Snowden confirmed the CIA program and said code names in the documents are real; that they could only be known by a ‘cleared insider;’ the FBI and CIA knew all about the digital loopholes, but kept them open to spy; and that the leaks provided the ‘first public evidence’ that the US government secretly paid to keep U.S. software unsafe. If that’s not serious enough, WikiLeaks alleges that ‘the CIA has lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal;’ several hundred million lines of code – more than what is used to run Facebook. Someone among the former U.S. government hackers and contractors ended up leaking portions of the CIA archive (Snowden II?). WikiLeaks also stressed how the CIA had created, in effect, its ‘own NSA’ – maximum unaccountability included.
The following video was published by The Daily Sheeple on Feb 20, 2017 No conflicts of interest to see here… Jeff Bezos, the owner of Amazon, and the sole owner of the Washington Post has a $600 mil contract with the CIA to provide cloud services to the ‘deep state’. This shouldn’t be surprising to anyone, but is just more evidence to show how rigged the game really is.
History shows how the United States has staged dozens of violent coups worldwide since the end of WWII. Here the CIA will simply install its own compliant puppet leader in order to better streamline US interests with those of the target nation. This practice was not only confined to nation states, however, as we can see with the out-going UN Secretary General. The whole basis of the UN charter was to avoid the kind of undeclared wars of aggression suffered at the hands of Nazi Germany. Back in October, 21WIRE’s Vanessa Beeleyexplained: ‘To compare Saudi Arabia’s belligerent actions in Yemen to Nazi Germany’s undeclared wars of aggression prior to WWII is no exaggeration. In fact, one could make the argument that this Saudi-US joint venture is much worse, and a far more dangerous precedent. Likewise, the failure of a corrupt UN (who effectively sold Saudi Arabia its seat on at the head of the UN Human Rights Council ), led by an impotent Secretary General in Ban-ki Moon, to censure Saudi Arabia for its flagrant violation of international law, the Nuremberg Principles and the entire Geneva Convention content and implied framework – leaves the UN in the exact same position as the League of Nations in 1938.’ Now that US puppet Ban-Ki Moon is finally on his way out, we can see the true scope of the corruption he’s presided over – and the irreparable damage he’s inflicted on this international institution…
Submitted by Carey Wedler via TheAntiMedia.org, According to an unsubstantiated article by the Washington Post, anonymous CIA officials have confirmed that the Russian government hacked the United States election to favor Donald Trump. Though it’s entirely possible the Russian government attempted to influence the election, the Post has been widely criticized – for the second time in a month – for its failure to follow basic journalistic practices. Nevertheless, the narrative is sticking. But the outlet’s behind-the-scenes relationship with the CIA is nothing new. In 2013, a conflict of interest arose shortly after Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon, purchased the newspaper. As the Nation reported at the time: ‘[Jeff Bezos] recently secured a $600 million contract from the CIA. That’s at least twice what Bezos paid for the Post this year. Bezos recently disclosed that the company’s Web-services business is building a ‘private cloud’ for the CIA to use for its data needs.’ As this occurred, a petition calling on the Washington Post to disclose its new ties to the CIA when reporting on the agency garnered 30,000 signatures. According to the RootsforAction petition: ‘The Post often does reporting on CIA activities. The coverage should include full disclosure that the owner of the Washington Post is also the main owner of Amazon – and Amazon is now gaining huge profits directly from the CIA.’
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Dec 20, 2016.
Hillary and her supporters have vehemently asserted that ‘seventeen intelligence agencies’ agree with the assessment that Russia hacked the election. It might be greater news to the American people to hear that there actually are seventeen such agencies out there. Perhaps Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Obama might explain exactly what they are beyond the CIA, the FBI, the DIA, the NSA, and DHS. Personally, I feel less secure knowing that there are so many additional surveillance services sifting through everybody’s digital debris trail. – James Kunstler, ‘Deep State Blues’ The public voted with its wallet and truthseeking data reveals that in any election in which the growth in average household real disposable income is less than 3.1%, the incumbent party loses the White House. The study goes back to the 1932 election. Real disposable income growth was well below 3.1% in 2016 and the Democrats lost the White House. It’s really as simple as that, for the most part. In addition, enough of the voting public determined that, with the help of the Wikileak emails, Hillary Clinton could not be trusted. In fact, the Wikileak oeuvre revealed that the entire Democratic Party was indefatigably corrupt. At the root of this corruption is the Clinton Foundation. But beyond that it was discovered that, among other atrocities, the DNC conspired to rig the Democratic Primary against Bernie Sanders and the current DNC Chairman, Donna Brazile, slipped debate questions to Hillary ahead of the debates.
This post was published at GoldSeek on 20 December 2016.
It doesn’t come more scathing than this. On nationwide television, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump rubbished the Central Intelligence Agency as ‘ridiculous’ for making claims that Russian hackers helped get him elected. The CIA – America’s foremost intelligence apparatus set up after the Second World War by then President Harry Truman – is supposed to be the guiding light for occupants of the White House on all matters geopolitical. And here we have aspiring White House occupant Donald Trump telling the CIA to shut up. Over the last week, the spy agency was quoted by both the Washington Post and New York Times as having informed anonymous government officials that there was ‘high confidence’ that Russian-sponsored hackers had interfered in the US presidential election in favor of Trump over his Democrat rival Hillary Clinton. The alleged modus operandi to sway the election was the leaking of private emails to whistleblower site Wikileaks which implicated Clinton in big business corruption and fomenting foreign wars, among other scandals. It’s a sensational claim, especially given that the CIA or its unnamed official conduits quoted by the US’ two most prominent newspapers have provided zero evidence to support their contention of Russian malfeasance. Russia has flatly denied the accusations. As has Wikileaks.
I have never seen in my lifetime the deep hatred that is emerging in politics. Obama is clearly getting his CIA cronies to stir the pot claiming that Putin hacked the DNC to seek revenge of Hillary. But exposing the corruption inside the Democrats is just justification to overturn the election. Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) daughter and Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta are backing the effort to get electors to ignore the election and vote for Hillary. They are claiming they have now 30 people to turn and that means if neither candidate get 270, it goes to the House or Representatives. Yet we are talking about really turning up the civil unrest. The Democrats refuse to accept any loss and they are intent on trying to really force Marxism down everyone’s throats. We are talking about real bloodshed on the streets if this were to take place. It will be civil war.
Obama’s parting shot across the bow is his order of a full review into hacking aimed at influencing US elections going back to 2008. Instead of targeting the CIA or the NSA, WikiLeaks has gone after an organization Democrats actually care about – the Democratic National Committee and exposed its internal corruption. If Obama could, he would declare Wikileaks a Terrorist Organization and anyone who published its stuff should be thrown in prison. Nevertheless, this latest act by Obama is clearly a politicized action that seems more about widening the divide in the country and to continue to smear doubt over the election. The CIA claim that Russia hacked the DNC and gave the data to Wikileaks to help Trump against Hillary, is really questionable since there is no evidence of a hack. The FBI said that Hillary’s emails had been hacked by five foreign governments. They could not be 100% sure who, or what they got since the really classified stuff was omitted, but the CIA is now claiming it was Russia who hacked the DNC and got this collection of 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments from the DNC. There is absolutely NO WAY that a professional hacker who leaves no concrete trace with Hillary’s emails, would be sloppy enough to leave such a trace at the DNC.
In our initial take on the Washington Post’s story about the “secret” CIA assessment that Russia helped Trump win the election (since contested by the FBI), we said that this may amount to nothing short of a “soft coup” attempt by leaders in the US Intel community and the Obama administration, and warned to expect of a push by prominent democrats to pressure the electoral college to “take into consideration” these findings next Monday, on December 19, when the formal vote for president is set to take place. This is how we summarized the newly-formed narrative: Announce “consensus” (not unanimous) “conclusion” based in circumstantial evidence now, before the Electoral College vote, then write a report with actual details due by Jan 20. Put a proven liar – James Clapper – in charge of writing the report on Russian hacking. Fail to mention that not one of the leaked DNC or Podesta emails has been shown to be inauthentic. So the supposed Russian hacking simply revealed truth about Hillary, DNC, and MSM collusion and corruption. Fail to mention that if hacking was done by or for US government to stop Hillary, blaming the Russians would be the most likely disinformation used by US agencies. Expect every pro-Hillary lapdog journalist – which is virtually all of them – in America will hyperventilate (Twitter is currently on fire) about this latest fact-free, anti-Trump political stunt for the next nine days.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Dec 12, 2016.
I have watched incredulous as the CIA’s blatant lie has grown and grown as a media story – blatant because the CIA has made no attempt whatsoever to substantiate it. There is no Russian involvement in the leaks of emails showing Clinton’s corruption. Yes this rubbish has been the lead today in the Washington Post in the US and the Guardian here, and was the lead item on the BBC main news. I suspect it is leading the American broadcasts also. A little simple logic demolishes the CIA’s claims. The CIA claim they ‘know the individuals’ involved. Yet under Obama the USA has been absolutely ruthless in its persecution of whistleblowers, and its pursuit of foreign hackers through extradition. We are supposed to believe that in the most vital instance imaginable, an attempt by a foreign power to destabilise a US election, even though the CIA knows who the individuals are, nobody is going to be arrested or extradited, or (if in Russia) made subject to yet more banking and other restrictions against Russian individuals? Plainly it stinks. The anonymous source claims of ‘We know who it was, it was the Russians’ are beneath contempt. As Julian Assange has made crystal clear, the leaks did not come from the Russians. As I have explained countless times, they are not hacks, they are insider leaks – there is a major difference between the two. And it should be said again and again, that if Hillary Clinton had not connived with the DNC to fix the primary schedule to disadvantage Bernie, if she had not received advance notice of live debate questions to use against Bernie, if she had not accepted massive donations to the Clinton foundation and family members in return for foreign policy influence, if she had not failed to distance herself from some very weird and troubling people, then none of this would have happened.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Dec 11, 2016.
So we'll have a president who lost the pop vote by 2.1%, got in thanks to FBI and Putin. And supporters will demand respect. Um, no. — Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) December 10, 2016
In our initial take on the WaPo report of a “secret” CIA assessment, according to which Russia, without a shred of evidence, helped Trump win the election (it remains unclear just how Putin “hacked” several hundred thousands Rust Belt workers into believing Hillary Clinton would offshore their jobs), we summarized in five point how this was nothing short of a “soft coup” attempt by leaders of the US Intel community and Obama administration to influence the Electoral College vote. To wit: Announce “consensus” (not unanimous) “conclusion” based in circumstantial evidence now, before the Electoral College vote, then write a report with actual details due by Jan 20. Put a proven liar in charge of writing the report on Russian hacking. Fail to mention that not one of the leaked DNC or Podesta emails has been shown to be inauthentic. So the supposed Russian hacking simply revealed truth about Hillary, DNC, and MSM collusion and corruption.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Dec 10, 2016.
As we move into the final month prior to this year’s presidential election, the tempo of dramatic world events and developments that are breaking daily is mind-boggling. Every single day we are seeing more outrageously desperate actions on the part of the globalists and their US government minions. Among the latest unfolding developments this week all fast tracking towards world war against Russia is NATO’s violation of international law deploying AWACS (Airborne Radar Warning and Control system) in Syria despite only Syria and Russia possessing the legal right to control the embattled country’s airspace. With both US and Turkish boots on the ground in northern Syria and US-led coalition airstrikes regularly invading the sovereign nation’s airspace, recently targeting Syrian soldiers andplans to kill more, along with former acting CIA director Mike Morell’s recent call to begin killing Russian soldiers, the latest warpath rant comes from Army Chief of Staff General Mark Milley who is now threatening Russia (as well as China and Iran) with nuclear war. Spoken just like a true grade school bully on a playground, he boasts, ‘We will beat you harder than you have ever been beaten before!’ This is the kind of moronic leadership that rises to the top of the Empire food chain? I’m afraid so. God help us when his most likely next commander-in-chief is the warmongering bulldog herself Hillary Clinton who’s not any more civilized nor humane. She’s already made it very clear that any real or perceived cyberspace attack on America coming from anywhere in the world constitutes an act of war and a military response against the cyber-perpetrators’ country. After already vowing to bomb Iran and with her constant accusations blaming Putin for everything gone wrong in her miserable life, including exposing her DNC corruption scandal responsible for rigging her presidential election, she is also all but promising to launch World War III against nuclear powered Russia. Incisive insider Paul Craig Roberts and even Putin have both said so. The neocon insanity that she represents is committed to perpetrating both suicidal and genocidal mass murder. With a total of 7,100 US nuclear warheads as of August 2016 and an estimate reported two years ago of 2,150 operationally deployed nukes, America could destroy itself four times over while Russia’s 7,300 nuclear weapons would likely carry the same tremendous overkill power. When we’re all dead, it hardly matters who has what? As the Benghazi ringleader who gave the stand down order that sealed the fate of four murdered Americans would say,’What difference does it make?’ The sheer madness in control of our planet right now actually believes the elite can simply hunker down in their underground luxury bunkers, take a long nuclear winter’s nap and a few years later emerge like Rip Van Winkle unscathed in their grandiose fairy tale. Talk about madness!
21st Century Wire says… One glaring conclusion from last night’s US Presidential debate between is that there is virtually no difference between either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton’s view on what the US should do in Syria. Both are advocating for more war – for more airstrikes in Syria, and for ‘building safe zones’ which are actually ‘No Fly Zones’ (where only US Coalition aircraft are allow to fly). There is one vast difference however, between these two candidates. During her tenure Obama’s Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was both the architect of the US-led destruction of the Libyan State, and also of Washington’s secret war against Syria, officially from 2011. Clinton led the notorious ‘Friends of Syria’ lobbying tour through Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, which was used to promote the US policy of ‘regime change’ for Syria by bringing together Gulf Arab Monarchies (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, UEA and others) and other US client states to create a policy of economic, military and social subterfuge which, with the help of the CIA and others, has since destroyed large parts of Syria now occupied by Terrorist fanatical groups – who are backed by the same ‘Friends of Syria’ member nations managed by Clinton. From start, these two war were managed by what is allegedly a ‘liberal’ or left-wing Democrat Party. They are anything but. What this really means, is that the next ‘President Clinton’ is already priming Americans for a escalation of warfare in Syria come this January. Here’s why…
From DaisyLuther.com, It’s really quite embarrassing on a global scale when members of our own government seem to be deliberately trying to pick fights with people who aren’t interested in fighting with us. If you’ve traveled outside of the United States much, you probably know that we Americans have a rather negative reputation off of our own shores. Now, generally speaking, that isn’t our fault as individuals. You and I don’t create headlines that make waves throughout Europe and Asia. While average Americans aren’t directly responsible for this, our federal officials are. I’ve written recently about President Obama doing things in Syria that are worsening the conflict there. I’ve also written about the fact that he and Russian President Vladimir Putin are starting to butt heads. And finally, I’ve warned time and time again that war is upon us – and everyone knows but the US.
A year or two ago, I saw the much-touted science fiction film Interstellar, and although the plot wasn’t any good, one early scene was quite amusing. For various reasons, the American government of the future claimed that our Moon Landings of the late 1960s had been faked, a trick aimed at winning the Cold War by bankrupting Russia into fruitless space efforts of its own. This inversion of historical reality was accepted as true by nearly everyone, and those few people who claimed that Neil Armstrong had indeed set foot on the Moon were universally ridiculed as ‘crazy conspiracy theorists.’ This seems a realistic portrayal of human nature to me. Obviously, a large fraction of everything described by our government leaders or presented in the pages of our most respectable newspapers – from the 9/11 attacks to the most insignificant local case of petty urban corruption – could objectively be categorized as a ‘conspiracy theory’ but such words are never applied. Instead, use of that highly loaded phrase is reserved for those theories, whether plausible or fanciful, that do not possess the endorsement stamp of establishmentarian approval. Put another way, there are good ‘conspiracy theories’ and bad ‘conspiracy theories,’ with the former being the ones promoted by pundits on mainstream television shows and hence never described as such. I’ve sometimes joked with people that if ownership and control of our television stations and other major media outlets suddenly changed, the new information regime would require only a few weeks of concerted effort to totally invert all of our most famous ‘conspiracy theories’ in the minds of the gullible American public. The notion that nineteen Arabs armed with box-cutters hijacked several jetliners, easily evaded our NORAD air defenses, and reduced several landmark buildings to rubble would soon be universally ridiculed as the most preposterous ‘conspiracy theory’ ever to have gone straight from the comic books into the minds of the mentally ill, easily surpassing the absurd ‘lone gunman’ theory of the JFK assassination.
This post was published at Lew Rockwell on September 6, 2016.
This piece first appeared at TomDispatch.com. It’s not every day that Republicans publish an open letter announcing that their presidential candidate is unfit for office. But lately this sort of thing has been happeningmore and more frequently. The most recent example: we just heard from 50 representatives of the national security apparatus, men – and a few women – who served under Republican presidents from Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush. All of them are very worried about Donald Trump. They think we should be alerted to the fact that the Republican standard-bearer ‘lacks the character, values, and experience to be president.’ That’s true of course, but it’s also pretty rich, coming from this bunch. The letter’s signers include, among others, the man who was Condoleezza Rice’s legal advisor when she ran the National Security Council (John Bellinger III); one of George W. Bush’s CIA directors who also ran the National Security Agency (Michael Hayden); a Bush administration ambassador to the United Nations and Iraq (John Negroponte); an architect of the neoconservative policy in the Middle East adopted by the Bush administration that led to the invasion of Iraq, who has since served as president of the World Bank (Robert Zoellick). In short, given the history of the ‘global war on terror,’ this is your basic list of potential American war criminals. Their letter continues, ‘He weakens U. S. moral authority as the leader of the free world.’ There’s a sentence that could use some unpacking.
Based on the destructive policies of Bill and Hillary Clinton towards Haiti and Honduras, both in and out of political office, a Hillary Clinton presidency would be a disaster for the Caribbean Basin. The Clintons’ use of poverty- and earthquake disaster-ridden Haiti as a personal cash cow stands as one of the most egregious examples in recent history of American politicians using the misery of others to line their own pockets. After helping Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide regain power after a 1991 military coup, sanctioned by the Central Intelligence Agency, ousted him, the Clintons have done everything possible to ensure that Aristide and his progressive populist political party have not been returned to power. The reason why the Clintons have suppressed the will of the Haitian people is chiefly based on Arkansas crony capitalism. The US Agency for International Development (USAID), the infamous cipher for CIA covert activities, and members of the Arkansas Rice Growers Association (ARGA), who are political cronies of the Clintons, have wreaked havoc on Haiti’s once thriving rice growing business. Once a net exporter of highly-nutritional rice, a combination of USAID policies and one-sided Clinton-era trade deals destroyed the Haitian rice industry and made the country dependent on expensive and non-nutritional genetically-engineered bleached white rice from Arkansas agri-businesses. These agri-businesses have contributed generously to the political campaign coffers of both Bill and Hillary Clinton. In 2008, the soaring price of rice worldwide and price-fixing by US agri-businesses linked to the Clintons resulted in food riots breaking out in Haiti.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Aug 16, 2016.
When one thinks of the neoconservatives what comes to mind is their warmongering, and they have indeed been the War Party’s brains since their incubation inside the Democratic party and their defection to the GOPduring the Vietnam era. Yet there are other aspects of the neooconservative mind – or, rather, the neoconservative personality – that are significant, and one of these is their viciousness. These guys (and gals) fight dirty: the smear, the ad hominem argument, is their signature method. Remember the campaign against Chuck Hagel that targeted him as an ‘anti-Semite’ They lost that one, yet they are not the type to change their ways. They tried the same tack with Donald Trump, throwing every smear in the book at him, and their reaction to his amazing victory in the primaries underscores both the primal hatred they feel for their enemies, and their obsession with control of the institutions they infiltrate. For many months now, Bill Kristol, the neocons’ little Lenin, has been trying to gin up a fifth party candidate who will take enough votes away from Trump to deny him the White House. First there was Mitt Romney, and then was Sen. Ben Saase being floated as the chosen sacrificial lamb, and whenthey demurred the Kristolians turned to one David French, a scribbler forNational Review – who backed out after a week. But now, finally, the #NeverTrump movement – which was always a neocon front group – has come forth with a willing candidate: Evan McMullin, a 40-something year-old former CIA agent, former House Republican foreign policy director, and former investment banker at Goldman Sachs.