Welcome to Sott.net
Tue, 26 Oct 2021
The World for People who Think

Puppet Masters
Map

Snakes in Suits

One more time! MSNBC asks Bolton if Trump's 'too afraid' to take on Putin because he helped him get elected

Putintrump
© Sputnik/Mikhail Klimentyev/Kremlin via Reuters
Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump meet on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan.
MSNBC is still doing its best to spread the theory that Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election, thanks to an anonymous report from the New York Times claiming the nation paid militants to attack US troops in Afghanistan.

"Do you think that the president is afraid to make Putin mad because maybe Putin did help him win the election and he doesn't want to make him mad for 2020?" Chuck Todd asked of John Bolton in a Meet the Press interview on Sunday.

Comment: The last 6000 times this question was insinuated, the answer was emphatically 'NO'. Even miserable John Bolton could not answer 'yes'. We can't even say Chuck Todd was 'beating a dead horse'...there was no horse!


Airplane

MH17 trial prosecutors warn judges not to unravel Ukrainian cover-up, reject calling Gen. Konashenkov to testify

Ferdinandusse
Dutch state prosecutors told the court in the trial of the shooting-down of Malaysia Airlines MH17 that Major-General of the Russian Army Igor Konashenkov should not be allowed as a witness for the defence. To justify this in a hearing last Friday, the prosecutors revealed an illegal trick exposing the evidence in the case as a fit-up by the Ukrainian government's military and security agencies.

Dismissing almost all the defence applications to the court for new evidence and witnesses, prosecutor Ferdinandusse* (lead image, right) said: "We do not see any reasonable grounds for accusing the prosecution of not being objective" (June 26 hearing, Min 9:17).
[*] Ferdinandusse has a first name but this will not be reported. The reason is that Ferdinandusse repeatedly shows his animus towards the defendant, Oleg Pulatov, by refusing to use the conventional honorific "Mister". This is so customary in Anglo-American court practice that the Dutch refusal to observe it makes a display of prejudice towards the defendant. That this is exceptional Ferdinandusse revealed himself as he read his script. Twice he read out the name as "Mr Pulatov" -- at Min. 53:37 and 55:35. Ferdinandusse had typed the honorific in his script, but read it out by mistake; this is the exception that proves his prejudice. Ferdinandusse's practice is also in violation of the Dutch criminal code requiring the defendant in an indictment and in trial to be considered innocent until proven guilty. In court Pulatov is as much a Mister as Steenhuis the judge.
The trick the prosecution has asked the court to accept is that apart from the Ukrainian government's say-so, there is no chain of custody for the evidence of the weapon alleged to have been fired by the accused to destroy the aircraft and kill its occupants on July 17, 2014. If the Russian government says the Ukrainian government is lying, planting the evidence and fabricating the chain of custody, the prosecution has told the court to ignore the Russians - believe the Ukrainians. Presented in court last Friday, this chain of custody argument has transformed the trial into a Ukrainian war operation conducted by Dutch proxies, and mercenaries.

For there to be the trial of a crime there must be evidence; for there to be evidence there must be a chain of custody. Except in The Netherlands.

Comment: See also:


Bulb

White House cuts off deadweight in staff changes

White House
© Reuters/Leah Mills
President Trump has replaced his chief of staff, press secretary, legislative affairs director and domestic policy adviser and retooled his communications shop in a span of about three months and will soon bid goodbye to two top economic advisers.

Trump's White House has experienced a dizzying amount of staffing changes that began following his impeachment acquittal and seemed to accelerate with the arrival of new chief of staff Mark Meadows.

Trump has presided over a record amount of turnover in the Cabinet and senior levels of his administration, demonstrating a penchant for removing and replacing top officials as well as swapping existing staff into new roles.

But the recent staffing shake-ups have been striking particularly because of the proximity to the 2020 presidential election. Officials working in past administrations have been informally urged to hold off on leaving their roles in an election year until the ballots are cast in November.

Propaganda

New York Times takes anti-Russian hysteria to new level with report on Russian 'bounty' for US troops in Afghanistan

nyt troops
© REUTERS/Brendan McDermid/REUTERS/Lucas Jackson
The New York Times Building in New York ; US soldiers listen to a briefing at forward operating base Gamberi in Afghanistan
The New York Times published an article claiming that Russia was paying out monetary bounties to the Taliban to kill US troops in Afghanistan. There's just one problem — none of what they reported was true.

As news reporting goes, the New York Times article alleging that a top-secret unit within Russian military intelligence, or GRU, had offered a bounty to the Taliban for every US soldier killed in Afghanistan, was dynamite. The story was quickly "confirmed" by the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and other newspapers, and went on to take social media by storm. Twitter was on fire with angry pundits, former officials, and anti-Trump politicians (and their respective armies of followers) denouncing President Trump as a "traitor" and demanding immediate action against Russia.

There was just one problem — nothing in the New York Times could be corroborated. Indeed, there is no difference between the original reporting conducted by the New York Times, and the "confirming" reports published by the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal. All of the reports contain caveats such as "if confirmed" and "if true," while providing no analysis into the potential veracity of the information used to sustain the report — alleged debriefs of Afghan criminals and militants — or the underpinning logic, or lack thereof, of the information itself.

Bad Guys

Former French PM Fillon found guilty of embezzling funds

Fillon
© Thomas Samson/AFP/Getty Images
François Fillon (right) and his wife, Penelope Fillon, were found guilty of fraud after a trial heard he paid her and two of their children for non-existent jobs.
The former French prime minister François Fillon and his Welsh wife, Penelope, were sentenced to jail on Monday for embezzling public funds as part of a "fake jobs" scandal.

A court found the couple guilty of fraud after a trial heard he had paid her and two of the couple's children about €1m for non-existent jobs as his parliamentary assistants.

In a scathing verdict, the judge said Fillon, 66, who was prime minister under the centre-right president Nicolas Sarkozy, had eroded trust in France's political class.

The court said Mrs Fillon, 64, was paid "the maximum possible" and that the sums were "out of proportion to her activities".

Comment: One does wonder, since this kind of scam happens all the time by those in power, what did Fillion do to make the establishment turn on him? Did he pose a threat to Macron's rise to power?


Putin

Democrats call for investigation as Trump labels reports of Russian bounties to Taliban for killing US troops possible hoax by fake news

daily on defense
'POSSIBLY ANOTHER FABRICATED RUSSIA HOAX': Three days after the news first broke in the New York Times, President Trump says the reason he was never briefed on intelligence that the Taliban have been paid by Russia to target U.S. troops in Afghanistan is that his advisers don't believe the intelligence is accurate.

"Intel just reported to me that they did not find this info credible, and therefore did not report it to me or VP," Trump tweeted last night. "Possibly another fabricated Russia Hoax, maybe by the Fake News @nytimesbooks, wanting to make Republicans look bad!!!"

Earlier in the evening, National Security Council spokesman John Ullyot told the Washington Examiner that Trump had not been briefed because of a lack of consensus within the intelligence community, adding that "the veracity of the underlying allegations continues to be evaluated."

MULTIPLE REPORTS: While Trump singled out the New York Times, the story was quickly matched by other major news organizations, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and Fox News.

In fact, Trump's tweet was in response to one by his reliable supporter, Sen. Lindsey Graham, who himself was reacting to a Fox News report. "Imperative Congress get to the bottom of recent media reports that Russian GRU units in Afghanistan have offered to pay the Taliban to kill American soldiers with the goal of pushing America out of the region," Graham tweeted.


Comment: Soulless hacks like Graham know that just repeating the allegation is enough - damage done. They know the reports are fake. They just use them for cheap but effective propaganda purposes.


Comment: One possible motivation, aside for your usual run-of-the-mill Putin Derangement Syndrome:
"It is clear that there are forces in the US which don't want to withdraw from Afghanistan, (and) want a justification for their own failures. This is what it's all about," Zamir Kabulov, Russia's presidential envoy to Afghanistan, told news agency RIA Novosti.

"We really shouldn't waste time commenting on an obvious lie," he added.



Star of David

Netanyahu's West Bank annexation scheme: Four scenarios Israel could follow to extend the illegal occupation

netanyahu annex west bank election
© Avshalom Sassoni
Benjamin Netanyahu announces that if reelected, he will extend Israeli sovereignty over the Jordan Valley, September 10 2019.
The Israeli premier seems to have abandoned his previous plans to apply sovereignty over 30 percent of the West Bank, succumbing to international and regional pressure. However, unwilling to show signs of weakness, Netanyahu is determined to force through at least some changes.

Special representative to US President Donald Trump Avi Berkowitz is set to hold talks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday as the two sides struggle to achieve a breakthrough in the premier's annexation plan that's supposed to be voted on two days from now.

What started off as Israel's "immediate right" to extend its sovereignty over some 30 percent of the West Bank has shaped into a complicated process, and now as the deadline is looming, an agreement on borders and boundaries between Israeli and the Palestinian territories is still nowhere in sight.

So what options does Netanyahu have? Here are four possible scenarios.

Comment: Rest assured, though Netanyahu may go with the tactically soft option 4, the goal of taking over the entirety of Palestine will remain paramount. The stealth move of individual squatter "communities" applying for "sovereignty" is along those lines (Hebrew):
MK Bezalel Smutrich told Ma'ariv in response to the report:
"There is an advantage in applying sovereignty to the localities themselves rather than entire areas, because in this case, the need to draw maps and borders is saved. This addresses the real concern in Israel that drawing the maps paves the way for the establishment of a Palestinian state. Thus, it will be possible, on the one hand, to normalize and continue to develop life in localities, and on the other hand there will be no danger of drawing permanent borders and consent, even indirectly, to a Palestinian state.
[Google Translate]


2 + 2 = 4

Everything You Think You Know About Coronavirus...

covid question
Despite government and health authority claims to the contrary, the accumulated evidence from the SARS-CoV-2 'outbreak' earlier this year points to it being no more significant than a seasonal 'flu-like virus' in terms of its infection and mortality rate, and that the significant death toll 'from Covid-19' is primarily due to the effects of lockdowns.

Boat

It's not about Trump: Berlin says relations with US are so bad even Democrats back in White House cannot fix them

us germany trump
© Global Look Press / Imago stock & people
FILE PHOTO.
The days of the good old 'transatlantic partnership' have passed, Germany's Foreign Minister Heiko Maas has admitted, adding that even the Democrats returning to power is unlikely to automatically bring those days back.

"Anyone, who believes that the transatlantic partnership will once again be what it once was with a Democratic president, underestimates the structural changes," the minister told German news agency dpa, hinting that relations between the two allies will never be the same even without President Donald Trump at the helm in Washington.

Still, he also admitted that Berlin is not ready to give up on its longstanding alliance with Washington just yet. "The transatlantic relations are extraordinarily important, they will remain important and we are working to make sure they have a future," he said.

Comment: See also: Europe, US, China, Russia, the failing economy, populism: Angela Merkel interview in full


Syringe

EU keeps quiet over suspicious vaccination passport documents

macron lab covid
Surprise, surprise, the European Commission (EC) had a "Roadmap on Vaccination" ready months before the COVID-19 pandemic broke out.

The Roadmap should lead to a "commission proposal for a common vaccination card / passport for EU citizens by 2022".

Last updated during the third quarter of 2019, the 10-page document was followed, on September 12th, by a "global vaccination summit" jointly hosted by the EC and the World Health Organization (WHO).

Under the header "Ten Actions Towards Vaccination for All - Everyone should be able to benefit from the power of vaccination", the summit manifesto laments that:
"Despite the availability of safe and effective vaccines, lack of access, vaccine shortages, misinformation, complacency towards disease risks, diminishing public confidence in the value of vaccines and disinvestments are harming vaccination rates worldwide."



Comment: So the problem isn't just that some people are not "able" to allegedly benefit; it's that some don't want to, or don't believe that there is an actual benefit. That's their choice, but technocrats tend to be little totalitarians. People's choices don't matter to them. They must be forced to comply.


And with them, arguably, the pharmaceutical companies' profits.