© Charlotte Observer
Imposing new anti-Russian measures is
a sore loser reaction by the outgoing administration to their candidate's loss in the race to the White House, and
reeks of hypocrisy as the US meddles in other countries' affairs all the time,
former UK diplomat Peter Ford told RT.
Ford served as British Ambassador to Bahrain in 1999-2003 and then as Ambassador to Syria, until he retired from UK's diplomatic service in 2006. In recent years, he has become known as a
vocal critic of UK policy in Syria. "What really strikes me is the hypocrisy of the American reaction, it's so childish, it's obvious sour grapes for having lost, for Clinton's having lost the election," Ford told RT, commenting on the
array of anti-Russian sanctions announced by US President Barack Obama on Thursday in
retaliation to the alleged hacking of US institutions and individuals which Washington attributes to the Russian government.
Ford noted that the claims by Washington of Moscow's interference into the US internal policy are poorly substantiated and seem preposterous as they stem from a country that has a long history of meddling into the internal affairs of other countries. "America interferes in elections and referenda around the world every week. Only a few months ago, Obama came to Britain and brazenly and
openly interfered into Brexit conspiring with David Cameron in a clearly prearranged script," Ford said, recounting Obama's threats to put the UK at
"the back of the queue" for trade deals with the US if it voted to quit the EU in June.
Although Obama's comments in the UK angered part of the British public, his
interference in its domestic politics went "almost unnoticed," according to Ford. Contrary to this episode, in the case of "Russian hackers" allegedly breaking into the DNC, to obtain the emails smearing the Democratic candidate, the evidence is murky but accusations are abundant.
"To accuse Russia, providing no proof, by the way, is amazing," he said, calling the US response a "petulant, childish, pointless" reaction. Ford added that even if Moscow had somehow contributed to the leaks, "it did a service to humanity" by
"exposing Clinton" and her camp's conspiracy against Bernie Sanders.
Comment: The report doesn't even mention Wikileaks... The NSA knows what happened, so why are they silent? As Robert Parry writes for Consortium News, the report falls far short of "detailing" anything (in reference to the NYT FakeNews assertion: "The F.B.I. and Department of Homeland Security released a report on Thursday detailing the ways that Russia acted to influence the American election through cyberespionage"). He also points out the blatant use of the passive voice in the statement that "information was leaked" (by whom? they don't say).