Puppet MastersS


Info

Classified cable found on Weiner's laptop shows Assange warrant issued 2 weeks after Swedish election leaks warning

wikileaks
© Corbis / Getty Images
A confidential document found on Anthony Weiner's laptop reveals that the United States Embassy in Stockholm, Sweden expressed concerns in 2010 that WikiLeaks would release classified US documents related to Sweden ahead of the September 19 Swedish election, tipping the vote towards the Pirate Party. The subject of the cable reads "Wikileaks: The Pirate Party's White Horse Into Sweden's Parliament?"

On June 29, 2010 a US diplomat met with three members of the Pirate Party - which is described in the cable as a "mixture between communism and libertarianism," yet whose members are "well-salaried professionals, independent from the party for income." Two of the "pirates," according to the report, were active in the "youth branch of the conservative party currently leading government."

The Embassy cable notes the "grim electoral outlook for Pirates" - as confirmed by a Pirate party member interviewed by the US diplomat, "Unless WikiLeaks Saves the Day."

Comment: See also:


Megaphone

Former Obama advisers tell Trump to 'be quiet' if he wants to help Iranian protestors

Susan Rice Obama
© Pete Souza/The White House via Getty Images
Several key advisers to former President Barack Obama have poured scorn on President Donald Trump's support for the protests sweeping Iran in recent days.

In 2009, when the "Green Revolution" threatened the Iranian regime, Obama and his administration refrained from supporting the protests. Obama said that "we respect Iranian sovereignty and want to avoid the United States being the issue inside of Iran."

That weak response, and the administration's general lack of support for the demonstrators, allowed the regime to consolidate power.

Obama was more concerned with preserving the possibility of an eventual deal on Iran's nuclear program than he was in removing the Iranian regime as a strategic threat or in standing up for human rights. Critics charge that Obama missed a golden opportunity.


Comment: A golden opportunity for regime change? Like they did in Libya - now a nation deep in chaos - or like they tried to do in Syria, at the cost of thousands of human lives?


President Trump has taken the opposite approach, vigorously supporting the protests and criticizing the regime:


Comment: This is a fake debate. Trump is probably 'supporting' the demonstrations because his deep state 'advisers' and Zionist supporters told him it is time to focus on regime change in Iran, now that toppling Assad in Syria failed. Some of the Obama people are (for now) taking a different stance, not because they worry about Iran's sovereignty (they didn't worry about Syria's or Libya's), but because they take every oportunity to attack Trump. But neither party actually cares for the well-being of Iran and its people.

See also:


Propaganda

New York Times attempts epic cover up story for FBI's Russiagate - but its sole source is "officials said"

NY Times Ministry of Truth
In July 2016 the FBI under its director James Comey launched an investigation against the Donald Trump campaign and "Russian influence" on it.

Comey and the FBI is under pressure to explain why they launched this investigation. The assumption has been that the Steele dossier, fabricated by a former British agent hired by the Clinton campaign, was handed to the FBI and led to the launch of its investigation.

If that is true (as it likely is), the FBI and Comey are in deep trouble. The dossier was full of hearsay and abstruse rumors. It was obviously made up and fake stuff paid for by Trump's opponent. To use it to launch an investigation and to get FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign stinks of partisan motives and may well have been a criminal offense.

On Saturday the New York Times came up with a story that is designed to usher the question away and to give cover to the FBI.

The headline already tells the reader what to believe: How the Russia Inquiry Began: A Campaign Aide, Drinks and Talk of Political Dirt

See - it wasn't the Clinton paid Steele dossier that triggered the FBI!

Comment: The gaping and misleading holes in the NY Times story (and the FBI's Russiagate investigation as a whole) can be plainly seen more with each passing day:

The NYT latest Russiagate story on Papadopoulos has no credibility. Here's why


Snakes in Suits

Alexey Navalny's phoney bid for the Russian Presidency and the US media's role in it

Navalny
Alexey Navalny's attempt to overturn the decision of Russia's Central Election Commission that he is ineligible to stand in Russia's Presidential election in March was rejected today by Russia's Supreme Court.

The Central Election Commission, headed by Ella Pamfilova, ruled unanimously that Navalny is ineligible to stand for election because of a previous unspent conviction for which he has received a suspended prison sentence.

The relevant legal provision would appear to be Article 3(5) of the Law on the Election of the President of the Russian Federation.

This is a Yeltsin era law and its relevant provision reads as follows
5. A citizen of the Russian Federation found incapable by a court or kept in places of confinement under a court sentence shall have no rights to elect or be elected President of the Russian Federation.
This is clear enough, with the Law granting the Central Election Commission no leeway to set the provision aside.

Comment: When one considers that Alexey Navalny is basically a trained and supported shill for US hegemonic interests in Russia, the Western media's disinformation peddling on his presidential bid certainly makes a lot of sense:


Cheeseburger

Sec Def Mattis wants larger US civilian presence in Syria

Mattis
US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said on Friday that he expected to see a larger US civilian presence in Syria, including contractors and diplomats, as the fight against Islamic State militants nears its end and the focus turns toward rebuilding and ensuring the militants do not return.

The United States has about 2,000 troops in Syria fighting Islamic State. Mattis' comments are likely to anger Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who has previously called US troops "illegal invader" forces.

"What we will be doing is shifting from what I would call an offensive, shifting from an offensive terrain-seizing approach to a stabilizing... you'll see more US diplomats on the ground," Mattis said.

He has previously stated that US forces will stay in Syria as long as Islamic State fighters want to fight and prevent the return of an "ISIS 2.0."


Comment: Translation: "We'll continue breaking the law for as long as we want to."


This is the first time he has said that there would be an increase of diplomats in the parts of the country retaken from Islamic State militants.

Comment: Satire can often help strip away the habitual normalization that makes absurd scenarios seem legitimate. In this case, to help remove the blinders, read this: Mattis' presentation of US policy in Syria becomes a little clearer with some word substitution


USA

Intel vets tell Trump: Top terror sponsor is not Iran

masks Shah
© SFMOMA's
A group of U.S. intelligence veterans urges President Trump to stop his administration's false claims about Iran being the leading state sponsor of terrorism when U.S. allies, such as Saudi Arabia, are clearly much guiltier.

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
SUBJECT: Is Iran the "World's Leading Sponsor of Terrorism?"
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY/BACKGROUND

We are concerned by recent strident and stark public statements from key members of your Administration that paint Iran in very alarmist terms. The average American, without the benefit of history, could easily be persuaded that Iran poses an imminent threat and that there is no alternative for us but military conflict.

We find this uncomfortably familiar territory. Ten years ago former President George W. Bush was contemplating a war with Iran when, in November of 2007, intelligence analysts issued a formal National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) debunking the prevailing conventional wisdom; namely, that Iran was on the verge of getting a nuclear weapon. The NIE concluded that Iran had stopped working on a nuclear weapon in 2003.

Recalling this moment in his memoir, Decision Points, President Bush noted that the NIE's "eye-popping" intelligence findings stayed his hand. He added this rhetorical question: "How could I possibly explain using the military to destroy the nuclear facilities of a country the intelligence community said had no active nuclear weapons program?"

We believe that you are facing a similar situation today. But instead of an inaccurate claim that Iran has nuclear weapons, the new canard to justify war with Iran is the claim that Iran remains the "world's leading state sponsor of terrorism." This is incorrect, as we explain below.

Comment: The Trump administration is entrenched in the Israeli propaganda regarding Iran. It will likely take more than this attempted wake-up call to detach its convictions and reset its policies.


Propaganda

The NYT latest Russiagate story on Papadopoulos has no credibility. Here's why

Papadopoulos
© Liberty Front PressGeorge Papadopoulos
Attempt to distance Russiagate investigation from discredited Trump Dossier fails on Papadopoulos's inherent unreliability as a witness.

As confidence in Robert Mueller's investigation crumbles there have been the inevitable leaks intended to suggest that the Russiagate investigation is still on track and that despite the increasing appearances to the contrary there is actually some reality to the case it is investigating.

The leaks take the form of claims that Mueller is planning to issue a "supplemental indictment" of Paul Manafort supposedly fleshing out the tax evasion and money laundering claims he has brought against him, and more information about the strange case of George Papadopoulos.

Comment: See also:


Snakes in Suits

Clean Break II: Why Iran Hawks will decide to burn it all down

Makovsky
© C-Span
The 20th century was rife with partitions, many of them involving European powers carving up colonial possessions in Africa and the Middle East with what often appears to have been little or no concern for local realities. Perhaps the most famous of these free-hand attempts at state creation is the Sykes-Picot Line, whose legacy is very much still with us (and not for the better). But Sykes-Picot is far from the only example of European colonial borders that are still causing problems decades after they were drawn.

But who cares about all of that? It doesn't seem to be an issue for at least some of America's anti-Iran hawks. In response to Iran's rising profile in the Middle East, fueled mostly by a war those neocons ardently championed and the striking ineptitude of the hawks' new favorite Persian Gulf monarchy, the intellectual heirs to the men who drew those ill-fated borders are proposing, long after it might have done any good, to re-draw them.

Writing for Fox News on December 25, Michael Makovsky - who is no fringe figure, being CEO of the neoconservative Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) - suggests just such a strategy for countering Iranian influence in the Middle East:
Maintaining Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen in their existing forms is unnatural and serves Iran's interests. There is nothing sacred about these countries' borders, which seem to have been drawn by a drunk and blindfolded mapmaker. Indeed, in totally disregarding these borders, ISIS and Iran both have already demonstrated the anachronism and irrelevance of the borders.

Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen are not nation-states as Americans understand them, but rather post-World War I artificial constructs, mostly created out of the ashes of the Ottoman Empire in a colossally failed experiment by western leaders.

With their deep ethno-sectarian fissures, these four countries have either been held together by a strong authoritarian hand or suffered sectarian carnage.

Comment: By hoping to maneuver the borders of surrounding states, as if personal game pieces, Israel believes it will create its means to 'manifest destiny' -- coming from a country that has never recognized nor honored where its own borders begin and end.


Star of David

Israel finally agrees to EU deal that excludes settlements

Flags
© globalresearch.ca
Israel's government has approved an agreement with the EU that includes a provision excluding funding for settlements, seemingly consenting to the EU's boycott of settlements.

The agreement centers on Israel's part in the EU's ENI Cross-Border Cooperation in the Mediterranean (CBC Med) program, which provides funds for projects for non-EU countries in the Mediterranean area, such as Israel, Egypt and Jordan, Haaretz reports. The projects are largely focused on promoting development, education, technology and environmental sustainability.

As per EU policy, the ENI CBC Med agreement contains a provision which excludes areas outside Israel's 1967 borders from receiving grants. This means Israeli settlements inside the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights (which were occupied by Israel in the conflict) cannot receive funding under the program.

Comment: Coming to common ground on 'acceptability' means excluding all things unacceptable. It doesn't mean they don't still exist. Israel has dodged this fact and is taking the money.


Quenelle

House of Lords' Baroness Cox: Russia did the right thing in Syria

Baroness Caroline Cox
© YOUTUBE / CHRISTIAN CONCERNBaroness Caroline Cox
Baroness Cox, a member of the House of Lords, shared her views on the future of Syria, highlighting Russia's success in "expelling" terrorist groups from the country and giving the Syrian people the right to choose their own future. At the same time in a revealing interview to Sputnik she expressed her concerns (and hopes) with UK policy in Syria.

Sputnik: What I understood from the report based on your and your colleagues' visits to Syria is that your views were very different from the official position of the UK government on some key issues such as future of Bashar Assad and attitude to the so-called moderate opposition. So, I would be very grateful if you could describe briefly your views on that and also if you could share your views on what would be the right way forward for Syria.

Cox: Certainly. I think there are three concerns that I have expressed in Parliament.

Having been in Syria twice we met a wide range of people from the faith leaders the Syrian Patriarch, the Grand Mufti and other faith leaders in different parts of Syria and also local people like professionals, like doctors and intelligentsia, and musicians and artists, and writers, and politicians including members of the opposition parties. And they have got a very consistent concern over British foreign policy. British foreign policy has been committed to regime change and that's the thing that people inside Syria really are very afraid of because they fear there is no moderate opposition left. Forced regime change would just lead to another catastrophe like Libya or Iraq. So that is the first concern that I raise quite often in the British Parliament.

Comment: Hell must have frozen over: an influential Brit with loads of common sense!