#Resistance Hero John Bolton: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix


28-01-20 02:53:00,

Liberals should definitely get their hopes up very, very high that John Bolton is going to provide the information needed to bring down the Trump administration and restore order to the universe. Definitely put all your eggs in that basket and invest all of your emotions in it.


Friendly reminder that you aren’t actually required to care about the impeachment show or have any opinions about it whatsoever.


The difference between the totalitarianism of dictatorships and the inverted totalitarianism of “free” societies is that in totalitarianism they allow one ideology which supports the status quo, while inverted totalitarianism allows two ideologies which support the status quo.


Mike Pompeo lies so reliably and so significantly that in a very real way you would gain a more accurate picture of reality by believing the exact opposite of all his public statements than you would by believing them.


The establishment which runs the empire is not afraid of Trump, and it is not afraid of Bernie. It’s afraid of you. They can handle one man in the White House who is less than ideal. What they absolutely cannot handle is ordinary people using their numbers to effect real change.


The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has moved the Doomsday Clock to 100 seconds to midnight, largely due to senseless recent escalations between the US and Russia. But hey, nuclear armageddon is a small price to pay if we get to retaliate for even a single one of those $46,000 worth of Russian Facebook memes.


Fixing the world’s problems and fixing your own inner dysfunction are inseparably unified objectives. It’s okay to emphasize one more than the other at different stages in your life, but valuing one without valuing the other is a contradictory, intellectually dishonest position.


Some people who learn a bit about what’s really going on in the world start believing society’s problems are being driven by otherworldly forces like reptilians or Satanism because it’s more comfortable than grappling with the reality that our ills are very, very, very human.


Reading The New York Times to learn about what’s happening in the world is like reading Calvin and Hobbes to learn about tigers.

 » Lees verder

Firing Bolton: Bait and Switch or Changing Tack? | New Eastern Outlook


21-09-19 09:31:00,

John Bolton

News of US National Security Adviser John Bolton’s departure was followed by hopeful commentary both within the US and abroad that so too would follow the aggressive foreign policy he advocated – particularly in regards to Iran.

However, US foreign policy – including its decades-long belligerence toward Iran – is a function of powerful corporate-financier special interests dominating Wall Street and Washington, with figures like Bolton merely bureaucratic interfaces between these interests, the government, and the public.

While one would hope the news of his departure as National Security Adviser meant a fundamental changing of tack of US foreign policy, it is much more likely an exercise in managing public perception at best – and a cynical bid to bait and switch the public with promises of peace ahead of the next round of US provocations and false flags aimed at triggering wider conflict with Iran.

A Change in Heart Unlikely     

One must consider what is more likely – that US foreign policy toward Iran is about to fundamentally change from decades of economic warfare, sanctions, regime change operations, US-sponsored terrorism, lies, deceit, and attempts to trigger all-out war – to an attempt to foster genuine “peace?”

Or that the “firing” of US National Security Adviser John Bolton is merely an attempt to portray the US as attempting to “chose peace” before the next round of US provocations and even false flag operations?

Unfortunately the history of US foreign policy suggests the latter, with US foreign policy papers going as far as admitting to schemes of proposing peace deals with Iran before intentionally sabotaging them – attempting to blame Iran for their failure – all ahead attempts to justify wider conflict with the Iranians.

What is more telling is that the above described scheme was extensively written out in 2009 by the Brookings Institution in their paper, “Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran,” before the administration of then US President Barack Obama proposed and signed onto the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) better known as the “Iran Deal.”

The Brookings paper would state explicitly (emphasis added):


 » Lees verder

Bye Bye Bolton! – #NewWorldNextWeek


13-09-19 10:41:00,

Welcome back to New World Next Week – the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week:

Story #1: Trump Administration Asks to Delay Release of 9/11-Related Documents

Debunking the 28 Pages

NWNW Flashback: Trump Blocks Full Release Of JFK Assassination Records After Last Minute CIA Push (Nov. 2, 2017)

Story #2: Bolton Tried His Best to Draw the U.S. Into War. Luckily He Failed.

9/11 Suspects: Rudy Giuliani

Story #3: “Storm Area 51” Event Canceled Over “Safety Concerns”

Area 51: Did Netflix’s Bob Lazar Documentary Inspire New Meme?

Long-Hidden 9/11 Commission Interview With Saudi Prince Bandar Released; Intel Chief Prince Turki’s Withheld

You can help support our independent and non-commercial work by visiting http://CorbettReport.com/Support & http://MediaMonarchy.com/Join. Thank You.

Share this:

Vind ik leuk:
Like Laden…

 » Lees verder

Bye Bye Bolton! Eine gute Nachricht … aber nicht für jeden


12-09-19 07:11:00,

Manchmal gibt es sie doch: gute Nachrichten. Eine davon der letzten Tage: Der Abgang des „Nationalen Sicherheitsberaters“ John Bolton, einem gefährlichen Kriegstreiber, der vor nichts zurückschreckte, um die USA als alleinige Weltmacht im Sattel zu halten. Die unabhängige australische Bloggerin und Journalistin Caitlin Johnstone beobachtet die Reaktionen angeblich gemäßigter demokratischer Führungsfiguren auf diese Demission. Erleichterung klingt anders. Übersetzung von Susanne Hofmann.

Demokraten stellen Boltons Abgang als etwas Schlechtes dar

John Bolton ist nicht mehr Präsident Trumps Nationaler Sicherheitsberater. Trump sagt, er habe Bolton gefeuert, Bolton sagt, er habe seinen Rücktritt zuerst angeboten. Beide legen nahe, dass der Abgang aufgrund von Unstimmigkeiten über die Außenpolitik erfolgt sei, das scheinen auch unabhängige Berichte zu bestätigen.

Mir persönlich ist das herzlich egal. Mich kümmert es nicht, ob Trump Bolton gefeuert hat, weil sie sich darüber zerstritten haben, welche Figur der Sesamstraße einen Faustkampf gewinnen würde. Mir ist es gleich, ob Bolton von einem heftigen Windstoß aus dem Weißen Haus gepustet wurde. Es ist vergebene Liebesmüh, in einer mit verlogenen Soziopathen vollgepfropften Regierung die Details des Schauspiels auseinanderzuklamüsern. In diesem Fall ist es besonders sinnlos, denn das Einzige, was zählt, ist, dass John Bolton jetzt weg ist. Das ist gut an sich, ganz gleichgültig, wie genau es dazu gekommen ist.

Trump sagt, er werde in der kommenden Woche einen neuen Nationalen Sicherheitsberater benennen, und die gute Nachricht lautet, dass es – gleich wen er nun letzten Endes auswählt –schier unmöglich ist, dass er oder sie ein schlimmerer blutrünstiger psychopathischer Unhold als sein/ihr Amtsvorgänger sein kann. Denn Bolton ist ohne Übertreibung die schlimmstmögliche Personalie, wenn es um den Drang geht, einen Dritten Weltkrieg loszutreten. Derzeit ist ein gefährlicher neokonservativer Dämon namens Charles Kuppermann Boltons kommissarischer Nachfolger. Ihn beschreibt der politische Beobachter Jeffrey Kaye als „Reagan-Anhänger, islamophoben Neandertaler, ein Geschöpf der Rüstungsindustrie und sehr engen Mitarbeiter von Bolton selbst“, und es gibt Gerüchte, wonach ein anderer widerwärtiger neokonservativer Bundesgenosse Boltons, der frühere CIA-Analyst Fred Fleitz unter den Topfavoriten ist. Wir können also nicht darauf vertrauen, dass Boltons Nachfolger besser sein wird, aber wir können absolut zuversichtlich sein, dass er zumindest nicht schlimmer wird.

Es ist unbestreitbar positiv, dass der frühere Direktor des PNAC (Project for the New American Century,

 » Lees verder

John Bolton: USA sprechen sich für einen “No Deal”-Brexit aus | www.konjunktion.info


13-08-19 10:27:00,

John Bolton - Bildquelle: Wikipedia / Gage Skidmore; Namensnennung – Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 2.0 generischJohn Bolton - Bildquelle: Wikipedia / Gage Skidmore; Namensnennung – Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 2.0 generisch

John Bolton – Bildquelle: Wikipedia / Gage Skidmore; Namensnennung – Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 2.0 generisch

Man kann wohl kaum von einer Überraschung sprechen, dass sich der Kriegshetzer und Nationale Sicherheitsberater der USA, John Bolton, für einen “No Deal”-Brexit ausspricht.

Bereits im März diesen Jahres warnte ich davor, dass ein “No Deal”-Brexit die wahrscheinlichste Option ist und dass der Aufstieg des “Populismus” in den USA, Großbritannien und in Resteuropa von den Medien zu einem gemeinsamen Narrativ verwoben wird. Dass diese Verbindung “No Deal”-Brexit und “Populismus” medial in unsere Köpfe gepflanzt wurde, ist kein Zufall, sondern Absicht.

Der sich beschleunigende Einbruch wird die Beziehungen zwischen den beiden Ländern USA und Großbritannien wieder extrem festigen, während sich der Rest der Welt vom US-Dollar, den USA und den europäischen Vasallen lösen wird. Diese Abfolge war vorhersehbar, da es das praktischste und am einfachsten umzusetzende Vorgehen darstellt(e). Es erlaubt den Internationalisten/Globalisten/Eliten (IGE) die Illusion aufzubauen, dass die “Populisten” den “politischen Fuß” in der Tür haben, während die IGE gleichzeitig das System zum Einsturz bringen und am Ende können die IGE den “Populisten” die Schuld dafür geben…

Die Vereinigten Staaten würden einen Brexit ohne Abkommen mit Begeisterung unterstützen, wenn die britische Regierung dies beschließen würde, sagte der nationale US-Sicherheitsberater John Bolton am Montag gegenüber Reportern.

Der britische Premierminister Boris Johnson will, dass die Europäische Union die Bedingungen für den Austritt Großbritanniens vor dem Austrittstermin am 31. Oktober neu verhandelt, aber die EU sagt, dass sie den Teil des Abkommens nicht ändern wird, von dem Johnson sagt, dass er geändert werden muss.

Die Sackgasse führt dazu, dass Großbritannien ohne formelle Übergangsfrist oder rechtliche Vereinbarung zu Fragen wie Handel, Daten und Grenzpolitik aus der Union ausscheidet.

“Wenn das die Entscheidung der britischen Regierung ist, würden wir sie enthusiastisch unterstützen”, sagte er.

Bolton sagte auch, dass Großbritannien und die Vereinigten Staaten Handelsabkommen Stück für Stück vereinbaren könnten, wobei schwierigere Bereiche in den Handelsbeziehungen erst später geregelt würden.

(The United States would enthusiastically support a no-deal Brexit if that is what the British government decided to do,

 » Lees verder

Iran: How Bolton tricked Clueless UK Conservatives into Confrontation with Tehran – Global Research


25-07-19 06:40:00,

Simon Tisdall at The Guardian explains the difference between Socialist Spain and the disorganized Conservatives in control of UK on foreign policy.

US national security adviser John Bolton tried to hoodwink both of them about the Grace I, a Panamanian-flagged oil tanker carrying Iranian petroleum through the Straits of Gibraltar. Spain monitored the tanker but declined to intervene because it remained in international waters. The EU position has been that unless ships headed for Syria came within 12 nautical miles of the European coast, they were helpless to take action because you can’t interfere with shipping through international waters.

Britain, in contrast, used its naval position in Gibraltar to seize the tanker in international waters on the grounds that it was headed to Syria, against which the European Union had declared an oil embargo.

There were three problems with the British reasoning, presumably that of Jeremy Hunt, British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and trailing candidate for prime minister. (Maybe also painfully inexperienced defense minister Penny Mordaunt, appointed in May):

First, the EU ban on oil sales to Syria concerned only EU member states.

Second, the Grace I was in international waters and seizing it is a form of piracy.

Third, there is no proof it was headed for Syria (which would not have been illegal in international law in any case).

Not only did Spain’s foreign minister, Josep Borrell, not fall for Bolton’s over-excited talking points, but he was withering about the British seizure of the tanker, since Spain does not recognize British claims on Gibraltar in the first place and wants decolonization.

That is, as Tisdall deliciously makes clear, Spain is siding with Iran against Britain on this issue.

Bolton and his fellow hawk secretary of state Mike Pompeo have been upset that the rest of the world did not line up with the US when it breached the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and slapped severe sanctions back on Iran (despite Iran’s faithful adherence to the terms of the deal). Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany (informally for the EU) were also signatories and stuck with the deal. France and Germany are even trying to find financial instruments to allow EU trade with Iran despite US opposition.

 » Lees verder

Bolton and Netanyahu killed 2005 Iran talks, ‘lured’ Trump into shredding 2015 deal – Iranian FM


09-07-19 12:39:00,

National Security Advisor John Bolton and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu scuppered a 2005 nuclear agreement between Iran and the west, and did the same with President Trump, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said.

“Bolton & Netanyahu killed Paris agreement between E3 & Iran in ’05 by insisting on zero enrichment,” Zarif tweeted on Tuesday. “Result? Iran increased its enrichment 100 fold by 2012.”

Referring to Bolton and Netanyahu as the “B Team,” Zarif then said that “they’ve lured Donald Trump into killing JCPOA w/the same delusion,” referring to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or Iran Nuclear Deal.

Also on rt.com
As Iran is pushed to step further away from nuclear deal, what’s next?

Iran stepped up its uranium enrichment on Monday, going beyond the JCPOA-mandated cap of 3.67 percent purification level, in response to the US’ unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA last year, and application of biting economic sanctions on Iran. The step-up in enrichment was also carried out as a response to the JCPOA’s European signatories’ failure to live up to their trade obligations with Iran under the deal.

Prior to Trump’s withdrawal from the deal, Netanyahu had pressured his American counterpart to abandon the deal, calling it a “historic mistake” and accusing Tehran of cheating on the deal – with the aid of a theatrical slideshow. In the run-up to the US withdrawal last year, Bolton, a longtime Iran war-hawk, called the deal a scam and promised regime change in the Islamic Republic by the year’s end.

Also on rt.com
The world knows Iran doesn’t want nuclear weapons – Revolutionary Guard’s chief

A similar situation played out in 2005. After reaching an agreement with Germany, France and Britain, Iran agreed to suspend all uranium enrichment and to fully cooperate with inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Though the US remained absent from negotiations, Washington then lobbied its European allies to demand that Iran have no uranium enrichment facilities on its own soil,

 » Lees verder

Trump: If it was up to John Bolton we’d be fighting WHOLE WORLD at once


23-06-19 05:54:00,

Donald Trump has confirmed that his top foreign policy adviser wants to embroil the US in multiple international conflicts. But the US president insists he retains final say on whether American missiles are to fly into Iran.

In a sit-down Meet the Press interview broadcast Sunday, host Chuck Todd asked Trump if he was “being pushed into military action against Iran” by his advisers – presumably pointing to the aggressive pronouncements from National Security Advisor John Bolton.

“I have two groups of people. I have doves and I have hawks,” replied Trump. “John Bolton is absolutely a hawk. If it was up to him he’d take on the whole world at one time, okay?”

WATCH: President Trump tells Chuck Todd that he has doves and hawks in his cabinet. #MTP#IfItsSunday

Trump: “I have some hawks. John Bolton is absolutely a hawk. If it was up to him he’d take on the whole world at one time.“ pic.twitter.com/JKVB2IvMVU

— Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) 23 June 2019

Trump then brushed away concerns about the influence of Bolton, who also served in the White House during the Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush administrations.

“That doesn’t matter because I want both sides,” said Trump.

Trump went on to defend his record of preserving peace – including speaking out against the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and the decision to call off a strike against Iran in response to a drone downing this week, because it would not have been “proportionate” and would have resulted in “150 dead people.”

This was the second time in 24 hours that Trump was forced to back Bolton, after saying on Saturday that the official is “doing a very good job” but adding that he “disagrees very much” with him on the Middle East.

Also on rt.com
US military ‘ready to go’: Bolton warns Iran not to ‘mistake US prudence for weakness’

Meanwhile, Bolton himself spent Sunday in Tel Aviv, warning Tehran not to “mistake US prudence and discretion for weakness” and asking his audience to “stay tuned” for further developments in the stand-off.

 » Lees verder

That Time John Bolton Said It’s Good To Lie About War


16-05-19 03:06:00,

Journalist Whitney Webb recently tweeted a 2010 video clip I’d never seen before featuring US National Security Advisor John Bolton defending the use of deception in advancing military agendas, which highlights something we should all be paying attention to as Trump administration foreign policy becomes increasingly Boltonized.

On a December 2010 episode of Fox News’ Freedom Watch, Bolton and the show’s host Andrew Napolitano were debating about recent WikiLeaks publications, and naturally the subject of government secrecy came up.

“Now I want to make the case for secrecy in government when it comes to the conduct of national security affairs, and possibly for deception where that’s appropriate,” Bolton said. “You know Winston Churchill said during World War Two that in wartime truth is so important it should be surrounded by a bodyguard of lies.”

“Do you really believe that?” asked an incredulous Napolitano.

“Absolutely,” Bolton replied.

“You would lie in order to preserve the truth?”

“If I had to say something I knew was false to protect American national security, I would do it,” Bolton answered.

“I don’t think we’re often faced with that difficulty, but would I lie about where the D-Day invasion was going to take place to deceive the Germans, you’d better believe it,” Bolton continued.

“Why do people in the government think that the laws of society or the rules don’t apply to them?” Napolitano asked.

“Because they are not dealing in the civil society we live in under the Constitution,” Bolton replied. “They are dealing in the anarchic environment internationally where different rules apply.”

“But you took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and the Constitution mandates certain openness and certain fairness,” Napolitano protested. “You’re willing to do away with that in order to attain a temporary military goal?”

“I think as Justice Jackson said in a famous decision, the Constitution is not a suicide pact,” Bolton said. “And I think defending the United States from foreign threats does require actions that in a normal business environment in the United States we would find unprofessional. I don’t make any apology for it.”

So that’s a thing.

 » Lees verder

John Bolton Is the Real Foreign Policy President of th US. He’s Playing Trump Like a Fiddle


18-03-19 02:31:00,

Curt Mills reports on Bolton’s extensive and expanding influence in the Trump administration:

But in the meantime, in return for his occasional, minor humiliation, Bolton enjoys wide-ranging authority to craft the national security policy of the United States, behind the scenes. He’s the contra Mattis; instead of resigning in moral protest, Bolton wears the mask of obsequiousness, while subtly nudging a reluctant president toward a more tough-minded line.

We have seen how Bolton has been able to delay and even partially undo one of the president’s initial decisions in Syria (all the while emphasizing that the president’s decision was being faithfully carried out), and his fingerprints are all over the demise of the INF Treaty. Now we are starting to see the same thing happen with North Korea policy. Bolton’s combination of shameless flattery of the president and relentless promotion of hard-line policies threaten to usher in one or more foreign policy debacles in the remaining years of the Trump presidency.

The National Security Advisor is horrible at his official job of organizing and running a competent policy process, but he has been able to exploit the ensuing dysfunction to advance his own agenda. He will rarely contradict Trump in public, and even when he does he will deny that he is doing it, and that affords him the luxury of being to craft his own foreign policy with as little input from the rest of the administration as possible. The predictable result is an increasingly confrontational and reckless set of policies. Because he doesn’t advertise his influence and consistently minimizes his role in public statements, he avoids wounding Trump’s vanity and secures his ability to lead Trump where he wants him to go. Judging from Bolton’s record, that means new wars and explicit policies of regime change.

Likewise, there was an important detail in this article on Bolton and the National Security Council that merits a few comments:

But before he resigned, the defense secretary wrote a sharply worded letter to Bolton, insisting that the paucity of meetings was crippling the policy process. Mattis was particularly upset that not a single principals committee meeting had been held to discuss U.S. withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with Russia, the INF[bold mine-DL].

 » Lees verder

Did Bolton Blow North Korea? – Global Research


04-03-19 06:40:00,

President Trump’s second summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un last week was criticized by both parties in Washington long before Air Force One even touched down in Hanoi. Washington’s political class seemed terrified that the nearly 70 year state of “war” with North Korea might actually end. In the end the only positive thing they could say about the meeting was that Trump apparently walked away with nothing to show for it.

The location of the meeting – Hanoi, Vietnam – serves as a great example of what can be won in peace versus what is lost in war. After losing nearly 60,000 US service members in an unnecessary war that took a million Vietnamese lives, the US loss of the Vietnam war resulted not in a communist takeover of southeast Asia but something very different: the domino theory failed because communism was destined to fail. Now we are close trading partners with an increasingly pro-market Vietnam. The result of trade and exchange versus war is a better life for all.

Unfortunately for Washington, the real lesson of Vietnam has not been learned. That is why the Republicans, Democrats, and the entire mainstream media spoke as one against President Trump’s decision to take a bold step and actually meet again, one-on-one, with one of our “enemies” to see if we can avoid nuclear conflict.

One leading Democrat, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA), attacked Trump for meeting with Kim because speaking to the North Korean “gives him legitimacy.” Does it make any sense that we should not even speak with our nuclear-armed adversaries because it gives them “legitimacy”? He’d rather have a nuclear war as long as Kim remains “illegitimate”? This is sadly the kind of thinking that prevails in Washington.

The media reported that Trump walked away from the meeting before the scheduled signing ceremony and closing press event. The talks broke down, it was reported, because Kim demanded an end to all sanctions before any reduction in North Korea’s nuclear arsenal. Washington sighed with relief and said all together, “better no deal than a bad deal.”

Meanwhile the North Koreans held a rare press conference clarifying that they only asked for partial sanctions relief in exchange for dismantling one of their main nuclear facilities.

 » Lees verder

Südamerika: John Bolton fordert venezulanisches Militär zum Putsch per Twitter auf | www.konjunktion.info


05-02-19 08:35:00,

Venezuela - Bildquelle: Pixabay / syafrani_jambe; Pixabay LicenseVenezuela - Bildquelle: Pixabay / syafrani_jambe; Pixabay License

Venezuela – Bildquelle: Pixabay / syafrani_jambe; Pixabay License

Ein großer Teil der wirtschaftlichen Schwierigkeiten Venezuelas hängen mit der sozialistischen Ausrichtung des Landes zusammen. Aber auch die USA, die UN und die EU haben ihr Scherflein zur aktuellen Lage in Caracas beigetragen.

Seit fünf Jahren leidet das Land unter US-Sanktionen, die es vom internationalen Finanzmarkt abgetrennt haben, was unter anderem dazu führte, dass die Ölproduktion einbrach. Venezuela ist derzeit nicht in der Lage Gelder auf dem Finanzmarkt aufzunehmen, um damit Mängel in der Ölproduktion/bei den Ölanlagen zu beheben. Der Einbruch beim Ölpreis verstärkte zudem die prekäre Lage. Zudem erhält Caracas aufgrund des US-Finanzministeriums keine Kredite auf dem weltweiten Finanzmarkt, um damit die schweren ökonomischen Probleme bis hin zu Lebensmitteleinkäufen für die Bevölkerung angehen zu können.

Wir sehen im Falle Venezuelas die Wiederkehr eines bekanntes und immer wieder gern eingesetzten Musters. Staaten, die sich dem Neoliberalismus (mehr oder weniger) verweigern, werden plötzlich mit Terror überzogen. Wenn das entsprechende Land dann noch kommunistisch oder quasi-kommunistisch ist, dann wird selbst eine False Flag-Terroroperation nicht mehr benötigt, denn nach Lesart des Westens reicht bereits die Venalität des Leninismus bzw. Stalinismus aus, um einen Konsens für Sanktionen zu erzielen; gefolgt von von einer Bodeninvasion, wenn der betreffende Staatsführer nicht fällt oder sich nicht bereit erklärt abzudanken.

Der Nationale Sicherheitsberater von Donald Trump, John Bolton, hat dieser Tage sogar offen zu einem Putsch gegen Maduro per Twitter aufgefordert:

Tweet John Bolton - Bildquelle: Screenshot-Ausschnitt TwitterTweet John Bolton - Bildquelle: Screenshot-Ausschnitt Twitter

Tweet John Bolton – Bildquelle: Screenshot-Ausschnitt Twitter

Ein bisher nicht gekanntes Vorgehen. Bolton fordert öffentlich einen militärischen Coup (mit möglicherweise Hunderten von Toten) ein, nachdem er bereits absichtlich seinen Notizblock mit Stichpunkten zu einem Invasionsplan zeigte. Weitere Fragen? Unerwünscht…

Dieses Vorgehen der Neocons ist bezeichnend. Es besteht aus Lügen, Fälschungen, Behauptungen und am Ende einer Invasion, um eine “Demokratie” per Zwang zu installieren, die jedoch nicht einmal im Ansatz eine solche ist.

Boltons “Demokratie” ist Neusprech in Reinkultur. Es ist ein getarnter Euphemismus, der verwendet wird, um das eigentliche Ziel zu verschleiern: die Zerstörung einer ganzen Nation, von Kulturen und Gesellschaften auf Kosten von Hunderttausenden, wenn nicht gar Millionen Menschenleben. Millionen an Leben wurden bereits für die “Demokratie nach Lesart des John Bolton” geopfert und doch spielt auch unsere Hochleistungspresse immer wieder mit – in diesem “Chor der Gutmenschen”.

 » Lees verder

Bolton: I’ll Send Maduro to Guantanamo – Global Research


03-02-19 12:53:00,

On Friday, the neocon running Trump’s foreign policy, John Bolton, threatened to send the elected president of Venezuela to the indefinite torture camp at Guantanamo. 

Maduro should be relieved. The previous neoliberal regime in DC had the disfavored leader of Libya assassinated, but not before NATO-backed Islamists sadistically raped him with a bayonet. The longer Maduro resists, the more likely a variation of the above scenario will play out in Venezuela. Indefinite detention without charge is no doubt the preferable option. 

Bolton is a well-seasoned neocon. He knows instinctively how to play the game. It was of course not a mistake his notepad said troops may be sent to neighboring Columbia. 

His hint about sending the president of Venezuela to Camp Gitmo is also not a mistake. These are the guys who set-up Saddam Hussein and arranged to have him sent to the gallows. 

On Hugh Hewitt’s show, John Bolton suggested that Venezuelan president Maduro could be sent to Guantanamo https://t.co/5B85dU44CH pic.twitter.com/feivveWHRn

— jeremy scahill (@jeremyscahill) February 1, 2019

In all cases—with the exception of Afghanistan—the primary objective is to control the vast oil reserves in Iraq, Iran, Libya, and now Venezuela, the country with the largest known oil reserve in the world. 

It is well-known that a Unocal pipeline and its rejection by the Taliban served as the pretext for an invasion of Afghanistan—and before the events of 9/11. 

In the former, the objective is to make Israel the undisputed hegemon of the Middle East and a forward base in the effort to contain the vassals, as former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski called the victims of neocolonialism. 

Considering Israel’s long-standing barbaric treatment of the Palestinians—and the establishment of an apartheid state—its multiple invasions and occupations of Lebanon, and its history of border provocations and false flag schemes (the Lavon Affair most prominent), it’s quite natural Israel’s Arab and Muslim neighbors are skeptical peace will ever be realized. This is exacerbated by the fact the peacemaker—the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner—is a confirmed Zionist and Likudnik. 

The neocon plan was designed for creative destruction in the name of neoliberal-corporate domination and secondarily in service of the geopolitical goals of the Zionist state. 

 » Lees verder

Forget Bolton’s notepad trolling, the real danger to Venezuela is neocon Elliott Abrams (Video)


30-01-19 08:00:00,

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org:

“Pay the soldiers. The rest do not matter.”

This was the deathbed counsel given to his sons by Roman Emperor Septimius Severus in A.D. 211.

Nicolas Maduro must today appreciate the emperor’s insight.

For the political survival of this former bus driver and union boss hangs now upon whether Venezuela’s armed forces choose to stand by him or to desert him and support National Assembly leader Juan Guaido.

Wednesday, Guaido declared Maduro’s election last May to a second six-year term to be a sham, and had himself inaugurated as acting president.

Thursday, the defense minister and army chief General Vladimir Padrino Lopez, with his top brass, dismissed the 35-year-old Guaido as a U.S. puppet, and pledged allegiance to Maduro.

Friday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the U.N. Security Council: “Now it is time for every other nation to pick a side. … Either you stand with the forces of freedom, or you’re in league with Maduro and his mayhem.”

By Friday, however, the world had already taken sides.

Russia and China stood by Maduro, as did NATO ally Turkey, with President Erdogan phoning his support. Mexico, Nicaragua, Cuba and Bolivia were also with Maduro.

Backing Guaido are Venezuela’s neighbors Ecuador, Brazil and Colombia, the U.S. and Canada, and the Organization of American States.

Britain, France, Germany and Spain have sent Maduro a diplomatic ultimatum: Agree in eight days to new elections or we back the 35-year-old Guaido, who, until this year, was an unknown.

All options are on the table, says President Donald Trump. But Russia called Guaido’s action a “quasi-coup” and warned that intervention could result in “catastrophic consequences.” Vladimir Putin also phoned Maduro with his support.

The stakes for all sides here are huge. Russia has contractors in Venezuela and has lent the regime billions. In a show of solidarity, Putin recently flew two strategic bombers to Venezuela.

China has loaned Venezuela tens of billions, with Caracas paying Beijing back in oil.

Cuba has sent military and intelligence officers to maintain internal security. Hugo Chavez had seen in Fidel Castro a father figure and modeled his new Venezuela on Castro’s Cuba — with similar results.

 » Lees verder

Sicherheitsberater Bolton verkündet indirekt: “5,000 troops to Colombia”


29-01-19 12:19:00,

Der selbsternannte Interimpräsident Guaidó stellt sich als umjubelter Erlöser dar. Screenshot von seinem Twitter-Account

Die US-Regierung ist auf einen Regierungssturz in Venezuela aus, jetzt schickt sie auch noch den Kalten Krieger und NeoCon Elliott Abrams an die Front

Die US-Regierung scheint entschlossen zu sein, in Venezuela einen Regime Change zu bewirken. Die treuen Vasallen aus der EU, Deutschland, Großbritannien, Frankreich und Spanien, sind auch mit dabei, Juan Guaidó, den selbsternannten Interimspräsidenten, der die Regierung von Präsident Maduro stürzen will, zu unterstützen. Sie haben Maduro das Ultimatum gestellt, binnen acht Tagen Neuwahlen anzukündigen, ansonsten würden sie Guaidó anerkennen, der allerdings nicht von der gesamten Opposition unterstützt wird.

Maduro ist aber aufgrund einer Wahl weiterhin im Amt. Nun könnte man nachweisen, dass die Wahl letztes Jahr manipuliert worden war, wie die Opposition behauptet (Maduro rettet Regierungsmacht inmitten schwerer Wirtschaftskrise), oder man könnte anführen, dass die Ausschaltung der Nationalversammlung durch die verfassungsgebende Versammlung eine Verletzung der Verfassung gewesen sei. Aber zu suggerieren, als wäre Maduro überhaupt nicht demokratisch legitimiert, entspricht der Haltung von Guaidó, Venezuela als Diktatur zu kennzeichnen. Er verkündet, wie die tagesschau unkommentiert wiedergibt, dass es 2018 keine Wahl gegeben habe: “Es gab keine Wahl in 2018. Die Amtszeit von Nicolas Maduro ist vorbei. Insofern besetzt er das Land widerrechtlich und regiert als Diktator.”

“Das Volk Venezuelas muss frei und in Sicherheit über seine Zukunft entscheiden können”, schrieb die stellvertretende deutsche Regierungssprecherin Martina Fietz auf Twitter: “Werden nicht binnen 8 Tagen Wahlen angekündigt, sind wir bereit, Juan Guaidó als Interimspräsidenten anzuerkennen.” Man hat wohl Sorge, dass das Momentum des politisch wenig ausgewiesenen Schützlings nicht lange anhalten könnte. Das mag auch der Grund gewesen sein, ein solches Ultimatum über Twitter zu verkünden.

Die Selbsternennung von Guaidó war eng mit der US-Regierung koordiniert. Kaum hatte er seinen Anspruch angemeldet, kam auch bereits Rückendeckung aus den USA – und auch von höchster Stelle, also von Donald Trump, der hier die Fäden in der Hand zu halten scheint. Vielleicht braucht er mit seinem Scheitern an den Demokraten über seinen Mauerbau und geschwächt durch den Shutdown der Regierung einen außenpolitischen Erfolg, einen Regime Change oder eine Intervention, um einem anderen Land die “Freiheit” zu bringen, wie das schon Tradition in den USA ist.

 » Lees verder

John Bolton Openly Admits He Wants Maduro Out, American Oil Companies In


28-01-19 10:09:00,

Embattled Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro might be forgiven for thinking there’s a foreign-backed conspiracy against him in repeatedly accusing the US of engineering a “coup” and waging “economic war” against his regime, especially given that US advisers are now quite openly admitting this is precisely the case. In fact just after Maduro’s contested reelection and swearing in to a second six-year term, his foreign minister Jorge Arreaza told Democracy Now that “Nothing that the opposition does is without the permission or authorization of the State Department… They say, ‘We have to make consultations with the embassy. We have to make consultations with the Dept of State.’”

While that broad brush assertion could remain over-simplistic, White House officials aren’t making it any easier for the opposition in terms of Maduro painting it as tainted by a foreign hand. As a prime example, Trump’s national security advisor John Bolton recently admitted to Fox Business that the US has a “lot at stake” amidst the ongoing Venezuela crisis given the fact that it has the world’s largest proven oil reserves. Bolton told host Trish Regan

It will make a big difference to the United States economically if we could have American oil companies invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela.

So it appears that as the administration contemplates ratcheting up both economic and political pressures in favor of opposition National Assembly leader Juan Guaidó, and as “all options are on the table” according to senior officials last week, Bolton in a candid moment which went largely overlooked by the rest of the mainstream media has given us a glimpse into the administration’s less than pure motives on Venezuela. 

“We’re in conversation with major American companies now…It would make a difference if we could have American companies produce the oil in Venezuela. It would be good for Venezuela and the people of the United States.” – John “Chickenhawk” Bolton, servant of Swamp King Trump. pic.twitter.com/M8rl8UqAdm

— HootHootBerns #RunBernieRun🌹🐦 (@HootHootBerns) January 28, 2019

“Venezuela’s one of the three countries I call the ‘troika of tyranny,’” Bolton continued (he’s previously identified Cuba and Nicaragua as the other two).

 » Lees verder

Buchanan: Is Bolton Steering Trump Into War With Iran?


15-01-19 10:05:00,

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

“Stop the ENDLESS WARS!” implored President Donald Trump in a Sunday night tweet.

Well, if he is serious, Trump had best keep an eye on his national security adviser, for a U.S. war on Iran would be a dream come true for John Bolton.

Last September, when Shiite militants launched three mortar shells into the Green Zone in Baghdad, which exploded harmlessly in a vacant lot, Bolton called a series of emergency meetings and directed the Pentagon to prepare a menu of targets, inside Iran, for U.S. air and missile strikes in retaliation.

The Wall Street Journal quoted one U.S. official as saying Bolton’s behavior “rattled people. … People were shocked. It was mind-boggling how cavalier they were about hitting Iran.”

Bolton’s former deputy, Mira Ricardel, reportedly told a gathering the shelling into the Green Zone was “an act of war” to which the U.S. must respond decisively.

Bolton has long believed a U.S. confrontation with Iran is both inevitable and desirable. In 2015, he authored a New York Times op-ed whose title, “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran,” said it all. He has urged that “regime change” in Iran be made a declared goal of U.S. foreign policy.

When Trump announced his decision to withdraw the 2,000 U.S. troops now in Syria, Bolton swiftly imposed conditions: ISIS must first be eliminated, Iranian forces and allied militias must leave, and the Kurds must be protected.

Yet enforcing such red lines would require a permanent presence of American troops. For how, without war, would we effect the removal of Bashar Assad’s Iranian allies, if he declines to expel them and the Iranians refuse to go?

Bolton has an ally in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

In Cairo last week, Pompeo declared it U.S. policy “to expel every last Iranian boot” from Syria.

And though Hezbollah has been a “major presence” in Lebanon for several decades, “we won’t accept this as the status quo,” said Pompeo, for Hezbollah is a “wholly owned subsidiary of the Iranian regime.”

But how does the secretary of state propose to push Hezbollah out of Lebanon peacefully when the Israelis could not do it in a month-long war in 2006?

 » Lees verder

John Bolton Aims to Plunge Us Into Another Generation of War


14-01-19 01:17:00,

National Security Adviser John Bolton lied his face off when he told Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on his recent Mideast junket that he was sure Iran’s leaders are dedicated to acquiring deliverable nuclear weapons. Nuclear security expert Joe Cirincione shredded Bolton over his false assertion, which is contradicted by UN inspectors and US intelligence.

Bolton made sure to tell Netanyahu this so that Netanyahu could quote Bolton in his own fantasy-filled and inflammatory speeches urging an attack on Iran.

Some 8 years ago Netanyahu tried to attack Iran himself, but was stopped by his own intelligence officials and officer corps, who saw the step as a catastrophe. Former head of Mossad Meir Dagan publicly questioned Netanyahu’s competency to govern in light of his looney fixation on attacking Iran, and I think by “competency” he meant ‘sanity.’

Axios is reporting that former secretary of defense Jim Mattis was disturbed last September when Bolton asked the Department of Defense for a contingent plan for an airstrike inside Iran.

The Wall Street Journal had reported that Bolton asked for the plan after a pro-Iran Shiite militia fired mortars into Baghdad’s Green Zone, where the US embassy is located. The blast walls around the Green Zone have now been removed, but since the US invasion in 2003, it has been one of the few parts of the capital safe from car bombings. It has occasionally taken mortar fire. The mortars last September did not cause any deaths or destruction.

Mattis reportedly felt it would have been legitimate to strike back against the Iraqi militia inside Iraq, but unwise to initiate a cross-border conflict involving a state.

Ironically, when Mattis first met Bolton, he joked that he had heard that he was “the Devil.” He appears to have been making fun of normal people concerned about Bolton’s excesses. So then toward the end of his tenure Mattis found out that we weren’t wrong about Bolton, and he had been foolish to be so insouciant.

American policy-makers’ stalking of Iran is not because the country is powerful but because it is weak. They can’t do anything about powerful countries like China or Russia, so they don’t tangle with them militarily.

 » Lees verder

‘Just fire him!’: Ron Paul blasts Bolton, Pompeo for undermining Trump


11-01-19 08:29:00,

Former Congressman Ron Paul has come out swinging against neoconservative voices in President Trump’s cabinet. John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, he said, should be punished for insubordination.

President Trump’s announcement last month that he would withdraw all US forces from Syria and the news that he was mulling a partial pullout from Afghanistan seemed to be the fulfilment of an often-repeated campaign promise. “I don’t want to be in Syria forever,” Trump said in December. “It’s sand and death.”

Read more

#ICYMI: Trump's Syria pull-out method is going to be slow, messy and angry (VIDEO)

Nevertheless, war enthusiasts in both parties and their cheerleaders in the media reacted with shock. Florida Senator Marco Rubio, known in DC as a foreign policy hawk, called the pull-out a “colossal” mistake and a “grave error that’s going to have significant repercussions in the years and months to come.”

However, Trump found resistance coming from within his own cabinet too. First, National Security Advisor John Bolton walked back the initial 60-100 day timeline for the Syria withdrawal. Bolton noted that the withdrawal would only occur after the US had drawn up a contingency plan with its allies in the region to protect Kurdish fighters in Syria from Turkish forces, and to contain Iranian influence in the war-stricken country.

Then, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo took off on a whirlwind trip to the Middle East in the new year, assuring allies that the US would remain open to intervention in Syria, and would maintain a “liberating” presence in the region: business as usual.

“When America retreats, chaos follows,” Pompeo said, in a swaggering, cocksure speech in Cairo on Thursday. “America will not retreat until the terror fight is over.”

“I think what Pompeo and Bolton did was insubordinate,” Ron Paul told RT’s Rick Sanchez later that day. “And I don’t know why Trump puts up with it.”

Trump, he continued, “stakes out, politically, a risky position by boldly saying ‘we should come home.’” Paul, a consistent opponent to foreign wars and interventionism, then blasted Trump for backing down to the likes of Bolton and Pompeo.

 » Lees verder

Bolton Threatens Syria: US Troop Withdrawal “On Hold”. Permanent US Military Base on Syria-Iraqi border – Global Research


07-01-19 07:46:00,

War Criminals

The prospect of Washington turning a page for peace in Syria is highly unlikely. Syria remains in the eye of the storm.

On Friday, a State Department official said “(w)e have no timeline for our military forces to withdraw from” the country. Delay may turn out to be not at all.

On Sunday, a senior Iraqi parliamentarian said

“(t)he  Americans have built a military base in Erbil (in) the Iraqi Kurdistan region to use…against Iraq’s neighboring countries, in particular Iran and Syria.”

Iraqi media said the Pentagon has 14 military bases in the country – along with a reported 18 in Syria. The US is highly unlikely to abandon them, especially ones considered most strategically important.

An earlier report indicated the Pentagon intends establishing a permanent base along the Iraqi border with Syria. Turkey reportedly established one or more military bases in northwestern Aleppo.

On Saturday, a senior Trump regime official said US forces may remain indefinitely at the (illegally established) al-Tanf base in southeastern Syria near the Iraqi and Jordanian borders.

On February 7, officials from countries comprising the so-called US Middle East war “coalition” will attend a conference in Washington to discuss what follows Trump’s Syria pullout announcement.

Whatever the disposition of US forces in Syria and everywhere else, its permanent war agenda remains unchanged.

Last summer, John Bolton warned Damascus, saying

“(j)ust so there’s no confusion here, if the Syrian (forces) use chemical weapons, we will respond very strongly, and they really ought to think about this a long time.”

Not a shred of evidence suggests government forces used Chemical Weapons (CWs) at any time throughout years of US-led naked aggression against the Syrian Arab Republic.

Plenty of evidence indisputably proves that US-supported terrorists used CWs many times, mainly against civilians, Damascus falsely blamed for their high crimes.

On Saturday, Bolton threatened Syria again, saying

“there is absolutely no change in the US position against the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime and absolutely no change in our position that any use of chemical weapons would be met by a very strong response, as we’ve done twice before.”

The Pentagon notoriously uses banned weapons in all its war theaters,

 » Lees verder

Pompeo & Bolton: Trump’s Tag Team of Death and Destruction


18-11-18 11:44:00,

Pompeo: “Iran’s leadership has to make a decision that they want their people to eat”

With the welcome departure of war mongering UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, the Trump Administration’s neocon tag team of death and destruction – Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo and National Security Advisor (NSA), John Bolton – have enthusiastically taken up where the repellent Haley has left off.  It is highly doubtful that the former Ambassador will meekly return from under the rock in which she crawled, but will reappear possibly as a primary challenger to her former boss in 2020, and, most certainly, as a Presidential contender in 2024.

Last week, Messrs Pompeo and Bolton were dutifully carrying forth Haley’s promises of mayhem to anyone opposed to US hegemony even if those “enemies” have never taken hostile action against the US mainland.  Of course, threats and attacks against nations which have done nothing to America have never much mattered to the foreign policy establishment!

In one of the most provocative comments ever made by a US diplomat, maniacal Mike threatened Iran with mass starvation of its population (via US sanctions) if it does not submit to Uncle Sam’s outrageous and humiliating demands.  In a BBC interview, the Secretary of State warned that:

[Iran’s] leadership has to make a decision that they want their people to eat.*

Following up on his genocidal warning, the Secretary of State (with a supposedly straight face) said that Iran was a “destabilizing influence” in the Mideast and was a state sponsor of terrorism.

Incredibly, the sociopathic Pompeo actually believes that Iran has been the greatest disrupter of peace in the Middle East when, in fact, it has been the nation in which he represents (along with Israel) that has been the real culprit of state sponsored terrorism with its destruction of Iraq, the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, and the attempted regime change in Syria to name just a few of America’s nefarious activities in the region.

A Brown University study shows the absurdity of Pompeo’s claims.  The study estimates that between 480,000 to 507,000 people were killed in America’s post-9/11 wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.  For the US, some 60,000 troops have lost their lives or been wounded.***

US destruction of Iraq

After threatening genocide of the Iranian people,

 » Lees verder

John Bolton Wins “Defender of Israel” Award From Zionist Lobby Group That Helped Appoint Him – Global Research


13-11-18 05:13:00,

The ZOA, Bolton’s enthusiastic sponsor, led the campaign to remove former National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster from his post after railing against McMaster’s “anti-Israel” positions, most notably his support for the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), better known as the Iran nuclear deal.

The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) recently awarded U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton the “Defender of Israel Award” during its annual awards dinner, which took place in New York on Sunday night.

Other awardees included U.S. Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell as well as Fox News television host Mark Levin. Both Grenell and Levin are close to Bolton, with the former having served as Bolton’s spokesman and the latter having worked closely with Bolton at the Department of Justice in the Reagan administration.

Though Bolton has received several awards from the Israel lobby in the past, due to his fervent promotion of Zionism and Israeli government policy, this more recent award is notable, as the ZOA is largely responsible for Bolton’s appointment as National Security Adviser within the Trump administration.

Indeed, beginning in August 2017, the ZOA – under the leadership of its president, Morton Klein –led the campaign to remove former National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster from his post after railing against McMaster’s “anti-Israel” positions, most notably his support for the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), better known as the Iran nuclear deal.

However, McMaster had also earned the ire of American Zionists for allegedly referring to Israel as an “occupying power” and acknowledging the existence of Palestine — as Zionists at ZOA and like-minded organizations support a revisionist history of the creation of the Israeli state that asserts that Palestine as a state never existed prior to Israel’s establishment in 1948.

Leaked emails reported on by MintPress earlier this year revealed that ZOA’s campaign to remove McMaster soon won the support of Trump’s top political donor, Zionist billionaire Sheldon Adelson. It was later revealed that Adelson had been instrumental in placing Bolton in the position McMaster vacated, as Bolton had long been a confidant of the politically influential casino magnate and Adelson had previously lobbied Trump – then president-elect – to include Bolton in his cabinet.

 » Lees verder

John Bolton: “Legt euch nicht mit den amerikanischen Wahlen an.” – Oder die Pflege des falschen Ost-West-Paradigmas | www.konjunktion.info

John Bolton: “Legt euch nicht mit den amerikanischen Wahlen an.” – Oder die Pflege des falschen Ost-West-Paradigmas | www.konjunktion.info

24-10-18 07:33:00,

Donald Trump polarisiert wie kaum ein US-Präsident zuvor. Viele neigen dazu ihn als Idioten und “Trumpeltier” hinzustellen. Andere dagegen sehen in ihm denjenigen, der den “Sumpf austrocknet”. Beides ist aus meiner Sicht – wie ich schon in zahlreichen Artikeln aufgezeigt habe – falsch.

Nicht Trump ist derjenige, der die US-Politik bestimmt. Nicht Trump ist derjenige, der im Weißen Haus das Sagen hat. Nachfolgender Ausschnitt aus einem Reuters-Artikel belegt wunderbar, wer die Macht in Washington wirklich inne hat:

John Bolton - Bildquelle: Wikipedia / Gage Skidmore; Namensnennung – Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 2.0 generischJohn Bolton - Bildquelle: Wikipedia / Gage Skidmore; Namensnennung – Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 2.0 generisch

John Bolton – Bildquelle: Wikipedia / Gage Skidmore; Namensnennung – Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 2.0 generisch

Der amerikanische Sicherheitsberater John Bolton sagte am Dienstag, die russische Einmischung in die US-Wahlen habe in Moskau eingeholt und dem Kreml eine Lektion erteilt: “Leg euch nicht mit den amerikanischen Wahlen an.”

Während eines Besuchs in Moskau sagte Bolton, es gebe keine Beweise, dass die Einmischungen – die Russland bestritten hat – das Ergebnis der Präsidentschaftswahl 2016 wesentlich beeinflusst haben, aber dass es Misstrauen gegenüber Russland geschaffen hat.

US-Geheimdienste sagen, Russland habe eine Kampagne von Hacking und Propaganda bzgl. der 2016-Umfragen durchgeführt, um Disharmonie zu säen, die Demokratische Nominierte Hillary Clinton zu diskreditieren und die Unterstützung für den Republikaner Donald Trump zu erhöhen.

(U.S. national security adviser John Bolton said on Tuesday that Russian meddling in U.S. elections had backfired on Moscow, providing a lesson to the Kremlin: “Don’t mess with American elections.”

Speaking during a visit to Moscow, Bolton said there was no evidence that the meddling – which Russia has denied – materially affected the outcome of the 2016 presidential election, but that it did create mistrust toward Russia.

U.S. intelligence agencies say Russia carried out a campaign of hacking and propaganda targeting the 2016 poll in an attempt to sow discord, discredit Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and boost support for Republican Donald Trump.)

Trotz der Tatsache, die selbst Bolton bestätigt, dass die Vorwürfe gegen Russland bislang ohne Beweis blieben, ist das transportierte Hacker-Narrativ den Internationalisten/Globalisten/Eliten (IGE) im aktuellen republikanischen Weißen Haus sogar noch nützlicher als zu Zeiten des demokratischen US-Präsidenten Obama.

Trump wird von den IGE wie der sprichwörtliche kleine Hund an der Leine herum geführt.

 » Lees verder

Why John Bolton Should Be Tried at International Criminal Court

Why John Bolton Should Be Tried at International Criminal Court

13-09-18 07:55:00,

National Security Adviser John Bolton appears to be spiraling down into the same miasma of madness that possesses other members of the Trump administration – perhaps caused by a microbe carried in Trump’s sniffle. This week he threatened justices of the International Criminal Court in the Hague with physical abduction were they to dare indict an American for war crimes committed in Afghanistan.

The International Criminal Court was established by the Rome Statute, which went into effect in 2002 has been ratified by 123 nations of the world. Most of Europe and all of Latin America and half of African states have signed. Virtually the only deadbeats are countries whose officials are afraid of being indicted by the court for serious human rights crimes, such as Syria, China, India, Sudan, Israel, Russia and . . . the United States of America (actually the latter four signed but they pulled out when they realized that they had exposed their state officials to prosecution, what with the war crimes they are constantly committing).

The ICC undertook to try dictator Moammar Gaddafi, but he was killed before he could be brought before it; it still has an outstanding case against the dictator’s son Seif. For Bolton to menace it in this way makes clear that he is in the Gaddafi category, which is why he fears the institution.

Bolton has no particular expertise in anything at all, he is just an angry shyster lawyer picked up by the more insane elements of the Republican Party as their pit bull. He once denied that the United Nations exists, then George W. Bush tried to make him US ambassador to the United Nations (he wasn’t confirmed, but served briefly on a sneaky Bush recess appointment).

So here are the crimes that I allege Bolton has committed, for which he by all rights should face justice at the Hague, at the hands of the same ICC judges that he just brutishly threatened:

1. Bolton played a key role in hoodwinking the American public into the 2003 US war of aggression on Iraq, for which there was no legitimate casus belli or legal basis for war. The UN Charter forbids the initiation of a war except where a country is attacked and responds in self-defense or where the UN Security Council designates a government as a threat to world order (as it did Gaddafi’s Libya).

 » Lees verder

Syria: Bolton’s ‘Damascus Chemical Weapons Plot’ Lacks Motive, Credibility | New Eastern Outlook

Syria: Bolton’s ‘Damascus Chemical Weapons Plot’ Lacks Motive, Credibility | New Eastern Outlook

28-08-18 05:24:00,


US National Security Adviser John Bolton – a tireless proponent of US-led war around the globe – has recently claimed the Syrian government is preparing to use chemical weapons to retake territory held by militants in northern Syria. In response, the US has already threatened to carry out military strikes against Syria. 

Bloomberg in its article titled, “U.S. Warns Russia It Will Hit Assad If He Uses Chemical Arms, Sources Say,” claims:

Tensions between the nuclear powers flared after National Security Adviser John Bolton told his Russian counterpart, Nikolai Patrushev, that the U.S. has information Syrian President Bashar al-Assad may be preparing to use chemical weapons to recapture the northwestern province of Idlib from rebels.

The article also claimed:  

In April 2017, and again a year later, the U.S. carried out limited airstrikes on Syrian targets as punishment for what it said was the use of chemical weapons. Bolton said any U.S. action will be stronger this time, the people familiar with the talks said.

However, not only has the US failed categorically to produce the evidence it claimed to possess regarding previous alleged chemical weapon attacks blamed on Damascus, it has also failed to provide any logical motive to explain why Damascus would carry out such attacks. 

The Syrian military along with its Russian, Iranian, and Lebanese allies have retaken large swaths of occupied Syrian territory from Western-backed terrorists through the use of conventional weapons, including precision strike capabilities provided by Russian military aviation. 

Alleged chemical weapon attacks have been on such small scales as to have no tactical or strategic value to Damascus, but demonstrable political value to the United States, its regional partners, and the militants it has been arming and backing since the 2011 conflict began.

Chemical Weapon Attacks: Cui Bono? 

The US media and its corporate sponsors have repeatedly attempted to explain the rationale behind Damascus’ alleged use of chemical weapons. This struggling narrative is best summed up by Atlantic Council “expert” Aaron Stein and US Army Reserve officer Luke O’Brien in their coauthored article titled,  “The Military Logic Behind Assad’s Use of Chemical Weapons.”

The article claims that chemical weapons are a cheap alternative for struggling regimes fighting wars “on the cheap.” The article proposes that chemical weapons are ideal for terrorizing the population and to target “buried facilities” that a lack of precision munitions have left otherwise invulnerable.

 » Lees verder

John Bolton Just Did a Complete 180 on His Russia Stance After Meeting with Putin

John Bolton Just Did a Complete 180 on His Russia Stance After Meeting with Putin

29-06-18 07:43:00,

Trump’s stroke of brilliance is paying off. By making Bolton responsible for talking to Russia he has neutralized the neocon’s worst tendencies


  • National security adviser John Bolton once said Russia’s election interference was a “true act of war” against the US, and that a policy based on trusting Russia was “doomed to failure.”
  • Bolton’s tune changed completely after he met with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday.
  • He also said President Donald Trump and Putin will likely discuss Trump’s recent calls for Russia to be readmitted to the G7 alliance.
  • When confronted by a reporter about his shift on Russia, Bolton said he would not address the discrepancy.

Is a puzzlement?  Not really.  It seems that John Boy would rather have a job than not.  And, then, there is the sheer exaltation of having been acknowledged as grand by The Devils themselves.

Maybe the prez should send fightin’ Jack Keane on a trip like this to provide him with an opportunity for an attitude adjustment.

  • 8648 reads

 » Lees verder