International Journalist Tells The Truth About Syria Reply

A must watch.

A relevant post from a YouTube commentor:

“The Assad government may not be all roses and sunshine (And I dare anyone to find me a squeaky clean government, any government), but it is a secular and moderate government. Shiites, Sunnis, Alawites etc. and Christians all lived there peacefully, way more peacefully than ethnic groups do in the US. Women enjoy a great deal of rights, they are not required to cover their hair or face, the universities actually had more female students than male. Assad is by no means a dictator, if you look at the region, he is a rainbow farting unicorn in comparison to some of the murderous psychos on US payroll.”

 

Former UK Ambassador Reveals Truth About Syria – With Special Guest Peter Ford Reply

A must watch.

Former UK Ambassador to Syria Peter Ford joins today’s Liberty Report to share his vast experience in the region. He has notably deviated from the government/media narrative about the alleged Assad gas attack. How likely is it that Assad used gas? Why are inspectors being prevented from visiting the site? How is the “official narrative” holding up to increasing scrutiny?

The World’s Five Military Empires Reply

Really just the USA, with the UK, France, Russia and China as minor leaguers.

By Frank Jacobs

BigThink.Com

Despite talk of American decline, the U.S. still is the world’s only superpower – if by that you mean: the country with by far the biggest military footprint throughout the world.

These maps, produced at the end of last year by the Swiss Institute for Peace and Energy Research (SIPER), show the geographic distribution of foreign military bases for five countries with some of the largest defence budgets (1) in the world.

The United States spent $611 billion on its defence in 2016. According to this map, that kind of money buys you a military presence on every inhabited continent of the world. According to SIPER, the U.S. has 587 bases in a total of 42 other countries, in addition to 4,154 bases on its own territory, plus 114 bases in U.S. overseas territories.

In the Americas, it’s easier to list the countries where the U.S. military is not present: Belize, Nicaragua and Costa Rica in Central America; Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, Bolivia, Paraguay and Uruguay in South America; and Jamaica, Haiti and the Dominican Republic (and, to be fair, most of the region’s island nations) in the Caribbean. And yes, despite the decades of hostility with Cuba, the U.S. does maintain a base there: Guantanamo.

Same thing for Europe: listing the countries without an American military presence is easier – and more instructive: Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, Sweden, Finland: all neutral countries, outside NATO. Serbia and Montenegro: the former enemy from the Yugoslav wars in the 1990s. And of course Russia, and its satellite Belarus. A few decades ago this would have sounded surreal, but there are now American troops in Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia and Albania.

In Africa, the American military has a presence across the entire north, from Morocco to Egypt (and including Libya); in a few west African nations, including Burkina Faso and Niger; and in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Malawi. Remarkable: the cluster of countries in the Horn of Africa with U.S. military presence, from former no-go area Somalia all the way to war-torn South Sudan. Noticeable absence: central Africa.

Also: pretty much the entire Middle East, except Syria and Lebanon. And Iran, if you include that country in the region. But again in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. If you were China, would that not feel like a link in the chain of U.S. military encirclement? That chain also includes Australia, South East Asia – from Indonesia all the way up to Vietnam and Laos – the Philippines, South Korea and Japan.

READ MORE

What Should Anti-Imperialists Do? Reply

A reader asks this question:

Hi, Keith. I am concerned that a lot [of]anti-imperialists are so used to America being the only and worst empire, that they are blind to foreign powers interested in becoming the next America, in the same way anarcho-capitalists are blind to the possibility of big tech companies becoming the next state. At what point should we be concerned about power shifting from Oceania to Eurasia and/or Eastasia?

The reader is referring to George Orwell’s use of “Oceania,” “Eurasia,” and “Eastasia” as metaphors for the Atlantic powers, Russia, and the Asian powers, respectively, in the dystopian novel 1984.

Certainly, anti-imperialists should not wish for the unipolar hegemony of the Anglo-American-NATO (Atlanticist)-Zionist-Wahhabi axis to recede or collapse only to be replaced by the hegemony of the rising BRICS-Shiah-Global South axis. However, the first crucial fact that has to be recognized when considering the relationship between the Western axis and Eastern axis is that the East is currently nowhere near the position of being a “counter-hegemon” of its own.

Image result for map of u.s. military bases around the world

There’s a long way to go before the East will be able to achieve anything approximating the hegemony that “Oceania” has had since the end of the Cold War. Compare the number of military bases the US and NATO have around the world with the number that Russia or China have and the Eastern powers barely show up on the radar.

Image result for map of u.s. military bases around the world

Probably the best scenario from anti-imperialist perspective (as far as anything that is possible or reasonable) would be a multipolar world and armed peace between the major powers who function as constraints on each other.

Within a multipolar framework, there might be more room for independent blocks of nations to emerge, for regional independence movements to proliferate and for startup societies or anti-authoritarian movements to develop.

I agree that “Oceania” is slowly being challenged by “Eurasia” and “Eastasia” but we’re still a long way from genuine multipolarity.

The main thing Western anti-imperialists need to be concerned with is the use of Russiahate, weapons hysteria, and faux humanitarianism by “Oceania” in order to hold or extend its position. Anti-imperialists in the East need to be focused on what their own states are doing because 95% of the time it is your own state that is your main enemy.

What Are “Assad Apologists”? Are They Like Those “Saddam Apologists” Of 2002? Reply

By Caitlin Johnstone

Medium

Isn’t it fascinating how western journalists are suddenly rallying to attack the dangerous awful and horrifying epidemic of “Assad apologists” just as the western empire ramps up its longstanding regime change agenda against the Syrian government? Kinda sorta exactly the same way they began spontaneously warning the world about “Saddam apologists” around the time of the Iraq invasion?

The increasingly pro-establishment Intercept has published an article titled “Dear Bashar al-Assad Apologists: Your Hero Is a War Criminal Even If He Didn’t Gas Syrians,” condemning unnamed opponents of western interventionism in Syria for not being sufficiently condemnatory of Bashar al-Assad in their antiwar discourse.

Last week The Times published an article titled “Apologists for Assad working in British universities,” frantically informing the public that “top academics” are circulating information that runs counter to the official Syria narrative, followed this week by a Huffington Post article attacking those same academics in the same way. Yesterday, the BBC ran an article titled “Syria war: the online activists pushing conspiracy theories,” warning its readers about “pro-Syrian government” internet posts.

READ MORE

Democracy Now’s “Alt Media” Platform for Humanitarian Imperialism in Syria 1

By Elliot Gabriel

Mint Press News

NEW YORK CITY — The dust had barely settled after last weekend’s U.S.-led bombing of Syria before a split in the political class developed. While some Beltway figures, media personalities and former officials hailed the bombings, others decried the “limited” nature of the airstrikes. At the grassroots level, a somewhat different debate gripped the left and the right — those who opposed the bombings were accused of buying into the propaganda of the Syria-Russia-Iran alliance, while would-be defenders of human rights called for increased military measures to degrade the killing capacity of the “Assad regime.”

Democracy Now!, the daily hour-long news show hosted by Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, has long been the flagship institution for U.S. progressives. With its jaunty 90s opening theme, timely coverage of world events, liberal (maybe radical-liberal) take on global affairs, and impressive range of top-tier guests including authors, government officials, policy experts and activists, the syndicated program is seen as an exemplary display of independent journalism.

No doubt, the New York-based show is in a class of its own when compared to the vapidity and sensationalism of shock-jock right-wing radio or smug, Beltway liberalism of Randi Rhodes, Thom Hartmann or Cenk Uygur. Like a gust of oxygen in the choking smog of AC360-Maddow infotainment, Amy Goodman resembles an enlightened aunt at a Fourth of July party — a female version of Ira Glass who brings a kale, cauliflower, almond cheese and cumin-spiced casserole to the potluck while discussing difficult topics in an unshakeably calm, Zen-like manner.

More…

Against NATO’s Imperialist Attacks in Syria Reply

Internationalist Commune of Rojava

It’s Going Down

The following statement comes from the Internationalist Commune of Rojava, and denounces the recent bombings carried out by NATO forces in Syria, which have been being planned for weeks, and carried out under the guise of ‘humanitarian intervention.’

From the Internationalist Commune of Rojava, in the Democratic Federation of Northern Syria, we denounce the bombings carried out this early morning by the NATO forces against the Syrian territory. These imperialist attacks led by the USA, with the collaboration of France and the UK, are a new example of the brutality and the imperialist thirst of the NATO forces in the Middle East.

The global powers make a display of their military industry, testing their weapons without considering the consequences of their actions on the civil population. The launch of high tech missiles under the pretext of a chemical attack which has not been proven abuses the instability in Syria making it testing grounds for the latest weaponry advances. The increase in market value of the companies building the missiles, which have increased their capital in over 5 billion dollars in a matter of hours, lays bare what war means for capitalism: profit.

READ MORE

Keith Preston: Syria Strikes Show Trump Is under Neocons’ Thumb Reply

 An interview with the Tasnim News Agency.
Syria Strikes Show Trump Is under Neocons’ Thumb: US Analyst

“The attack on Syria indicates that the Trump administration is now fully under the control of the neoconservative-controlled foreign policy establishment, and that any inclination the Trump administration may have ever had toward altering US foreign policy has been abandoned…,” Keith Preston, the chief editor and director of attackthesystem.com, told Tasnim in an interview.

The following is the full text of the interview.

 

More…

All the Good Anti-Imperialists are on the Right Reply

Some refreshing comments from socialist and Russia Today commentator Caleb Maupin. While Maupin is a socialist and I am an anarchist, this was more or less the same position I began taking in the 1990s and 2000s during the anti-globalization and antiwar eras, i.e. that the revolutionary left needed to reach out and build bridges to the populist and antiwar right. It’s interesting to see the anti-imperialist left actually developing such an outlook today, and being denounced as “fascist” for doing so (as I was back in the day). I have since moved away from advocating left/right hybrid movements (which I don’t consider to be viable given the level of polarization that exists at present) in favor of a “revolutionary centrist” approach (i.e. opposing the establishment center while rejecting the extremes of Left and Right, such as anarcho-leftoids and Communists or alt-right and neo-fascists), but I wish the anti-imperialist left good luck with their efforts.

The rallies against bombing Syria are saying: “Stop Trump’s War” & “March to Trump Tower.”

Do these people live under a rock? There is widespread opposition to this war among the broad masses of people, but not among “Stop Trumpers.”

Do they not see that Tucker Carlson is challenging the narratives for bombing Syria, while Democrats are accusing Trump of not being hard enough against Russia and Assad?

Average Americans have isolationist and populist sentiments more than ever. However, the people who run the anti-war movement and dominate the socialist and communist organizations have no interest in recruiting them. Instead, they hope to convince the Rachel Maddow fans! Its so sad to watch.

Tom Woods on Syria Reply

Some relevant comments from leading Rothbardian libertarian Tom Woods on Syria:

“Well, Woods’s Law is on full display these days:

No matter whom you vote for, you always wind up with John McCain.

It’s as if the President, in his scramble to imitate Jeb! and Graham, forgot that he’s the one who spared us those dolts.

What drives me especially bonkers is to hear conservatives, of all people, cheering for war in Syria.

Here are people who (are supposed to) believe in the fallen condition of humanity, have finite political goals (not “an end to evil,” in David Frum’s preposterous, anti-conservative formulation), and leave the utopianism to the Left.

They are likewise supposed to understand how precarious is the human condition, and be appalled at the hubris of the wise planner who thinks societies can be taken apart and reassembled like Tinkertoys.

And if they’re going to pretend that they just want to respond to a “gas attack” — come on.

Even if such an attack had been perpetrated by Assad, how can I be morally lectured to by people who have connived at the humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen? First Obama supporters, then Trump himself, aided or turned a blind eye to Saudi outrages there. (Trump’s belated, feckless objection amounted to nothing.)

More…

The ‘anti-imperialism’ of idiots 1

This is an interesting blog with an extensive amount of commentary about Syria. This blogger seems to hold to some kind of anti-Assad, Syrian leftist opposition perspective, and seems a bit soft on Western intervention. One thing I am not getting from this blog is an explanation of how the overthrow of Assad would not result in anything other than the coming to power of a Salafist regime, which is clearly what the Western powers, and their allies Israel and Saudi Arabia, want. When the Iraq War began in 2003, there were some pro-intervention liberals and leftists making the argument that the war was a “war against fascism” or whatever, and we know how that turned out.

By Leila Al-Shami

Once more the western ‘anti-war’ movement has awoken to mobilise around Syria. This is the third time since 2011. The first was when Obama contemplated striking the Syrian regime’s military capability (but didn’t) following chemical attacks on the Ghouta in 2013, considered a ‘red line’. The second time was when Donald Trump ordered a strike which hit an empty regime military base in response to chemical attacks on Khan Sheikhoun in 2017. And today, as the US, UK and France take limited military action (targeted strikes on regime military assets and chemical weapons facilities) following a chemical weapons attack in Douma which killed at least 34 people, including many children who were sheltering in basements from bombing.

The first thing to note from the three major mobilisations of the western ‘anti-war’ left is that they have little to do with ending the war. More than half a million Syrians have been killed since 2011. The vast majority of civilian deaths have been through the use of conventional weapons and 94 per cent of these victims were killed by the Syrian-Russian-Iranian alliance. There is no outrage or concern feigned for this war, which followed the regime’s brutal crackdown on peaceful, pro-democracy demonstrators. There’s no outrage when barrel bombs, chemical weapons and napalm are dropped on democratically self-organized communities or target hospitals and rescue workers. Civilians are expendable; the military capabilities of a genocidal, fascist regime are not. In fact the slogan ‘Hands off Syria’ really means ‘Hands off Assad’ and support is often given for Russia’s military intervention. This was evident yesterday at a demonstration organized by Stop the War UK where a number of regime and Russian flags were shamefully on display.

READ MORE

Keith Preston: Syria strike would escalate US-Russia hostilities Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

If the United Sates were to launch an airstrike on Syria, it would certainly escalate the hostilities between Washington and Moscow and even could develop into a direct military confrontation between the two powers, says Keith Preston, an American political analyst in Virginia.

Russia has said that threats by the US and France to launch a military aggression against Syria violate the UN Charter, calling on the West to “seriously consider” the consequences of such intimidation.

“At the highest level, the presidents of the United States and France threatened a tough reaction, with the use of force against Syria. I would like to note that the threat of using force against a UN member state is a gross violation of the charter of this organization,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Thursday.

The US and its allies have been threatening Damascus with military action since April 7, when a suspected chemical attack on the Syrian town of Douma, Eastern Ghouta, reportedly killed 60 people and injured hundreds more.

The possibility of an attack grew larger on Wednesday, after Trump warned Russia, Syria’s key supporters in the fight against foreign-backed militancy, to “get ready” to shoot down American missiles over Syria soon.

But Trump tempered those remarks on Thursday, saying the US response could be “very soon or not so soon at all!”

 

More…

Hezbollah does not see all-out war over Syria: Deputy head Reply

Press TV.

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem (File photo)
Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem (File photo)

Lebanon’s Hezbollah resistance movement downplays threats of a military action against Syria, ruling out a potential direct confrontation between the US and Russia or a wider war in the Arab country.

“We rule out the situation developing into a direct American-Russian clash or a wide state of war,” Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem told Lebanese daily al-Joumhouria in an interview published on Friday.

“The conditions do not point to a total war happening … unless (US President Donald) Trump and (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu completely lose their minds,” he said.

Hezbollah, along with Russia and Iran, has been helping the Syrian army in its battles against terrorists.

The US and its allies have been threatening Damascus with military action since April 7, when a suspected chemical attack on the Syrian town of Douma, Eastern Ghouta, reportedly killed 60 people and injured hundreds more.

The possibility of an attack grew larger on Wednesday, after Trump warned Russia, one of Syria’s key supporters in the fight against foreign-backed militancy, to “get ready” to shoot down American missiles over Syria soon.

The US, however, later muddied the threats as a number of its major European allies, including Germany, said they would not join such a military action.

Syria has firmly denied any links to the chemical attack. Both Moscow and Damascus have invited the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to send a fact-finding mission to Douma and investigate the alleged use of chemical weapons there.

Damascus has destroyed its entire chemical weapons stockpile under a UN-brokered program overseen by the OPCW.

Syrians shrug off US threats

On Thursday, some Syrians in the capital Damascus shrugged off the possibility of a US strike against the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

A Damascus resident said “Russia will respond” and another one dismissed the idea of missile attack saying US is “afraid of Russia and China.”

“They are only threats. They always threaten us. It is not the first time. It is not something new. We got used to it. Russia will respond,” said Eugenie Saadeh.

US seeking to escalate war in Syria to pressure Assad Reply

This interview is from 2016 but it’s highly relevant to what is going on now.

Press TV. Listen here.

The US is seeking to further escalate the years-long conflict in Syria through its so-called “Plan B,” in a bid to remove Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power as his government does not bend to America and Israel’s will, says a Virginia-based author and political commentator.

Floated for the first time by US Secretary of State John Kerry in February, US officials are advocating a so-called “Plan B” which seeks to provide vetted “moderate” militants with necessary weapons to launch attacks against Syrian government aircraft and artillery positions, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday.

Speaking to Press TV on Wednesday, Keith Preston, the chief editor and director of AttacktheSystem.com, said such reports signal Washington’s appetite for more destruction in the war-torn country.

“It looks like that the American government is now trying to escalate the war in Syria,” Preston said.

He said the ongoing truce in Syria that was mediated by Russia and the US and went into effect on February 27, has eased the conflict to a degree but Washington seems to be unhappy with this.

Preston said there is no such thing as “moderate rebels” in Syria and Washington is in fact seeking to escalate the conflict by providing anti-government groups fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad with heavier weaponry.

“Looks like the motivation for this is that the United States really is bent on overthrowing the government of President Assad,” he argued.

“The Assad government is an independent government that is not integrated into the system of American client-states and puppet states in the region and that is the real issue that the Americans have with President Assad,” he explained.

The analyst said Syria’s non-recognition of Israel is another major reason for Washington’s hostility towards the Damascus government.

Preston also referred to the ongoing parliamentary elections in Syria, saying it is interesting to hear these reports at such critical times when a political solution to the years-long conflict seems closest than ever.

More than 7,300 polling stations have been set up across the government-held regions in the country. Syrian voters are electing members of the 250-seat parliament out of some 3,500 candidates.

The preparations for the “Plan B” were discussed at a secret gathering of intelligence chiefs in the Middle East before the ceasefire went into effect and in exchanges between intelligence services, the newspaper said.

During those sessions, the CIA gave assurances to allies that they would be given approval to expand arms shipments to Syria’s “moderate” militants.

Syria has been gripped by foreign-backed militancy since March 2011. According to the so-called Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, at least 270,000 people have been killed in the conflict. Some reports, however, put the death toll at as high as 470,000

Tucker Carlson on Syria 1

Thus far, Tucker Carlson has been, to my knowledge, the only mainstream media figure to challenge the System’s narrative on Syria.

It’s interesting how the Republican Senator being interviewed said, “If you care about Israel…” the first time he opened his mouth. What if you don’t care about Israel?

It also seems to be the case that Syria has exacerbated the already deep rift between the anti-imperialist left and the anti-fascist left. The anti-imperialist left are primarily interested in opposing imperialist attacks on nations that refuse to be incorporated into the Anglo-American-Zionist-Wahhabi axis, opposing the escalation of hostilities with Russia and China, preventing war with Iran and Syria, opposing the Saudi genocide in Yemen, opposing Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians, etc. However, the anti-fascist left has has largely adopted the anti-Russian narrative of the CIA-neocon-DNC-MSM axis, regards Russia as the de facto headquarters of world fascism, takes what amounts to the State Department line on Syria, hesitates to criticize Israel out of fear of fueling anti-Semitism, and is mostly worried about “red-brown alliances,” “left-right crossovers,” and “fascist entryism.” Yes, I am oversimplifying a bit, but this seems to be the general pattern that is evolving.

Looking over the Twitter feeds of leading antifa and/or anarcho-leftoids, I see that Spencer Sunshine and Kevin Carson apparently have had nothing to say about Syria, while Goofy Gillis has merely retweeted an Alexander Reid-Ross tweet crying about “red-brown alliances” and another tweet lambasting Tucker Carlson. Also in circulation in antifascist circles now is this lengthy piece by an anarcho-leftoid/antifa essentially accusing anyone among the Western left that takes anti-imperialism seriously of being a partner in fascism. For instance, this article has been reposted on the Three Way Fight blog. Reminds me of all those conspiracy charts purporting to show the link between Jewish bankers, satanists in the Vatican, lizard people, chemtrails, 9/11and the flat earth.

It appears that on international relations, a neoconservative-liberal internationalist-antifascist axis is brewing.

The pseudo-left’s silent complicity in the drive to war against Syria and Russia Reply

It’s interesting to see various far left tendencies coming out and saying what I have been saying about the Western Left for years.

“Four of the most prominent pseudo-left websites—Jacobin magazine, which is closely connected to the Democratic Socialists of America; Socialist Worker, the online newspaper of the International Socialist Organization; the website of Socialist Alternative; and International Viewpoint, the magazine of the Pabloite, ex-Trotskyist United Secretariat, have written next to nothing about the growing danger of a major world war.

Given the issues at stake, any genuinely progressive, let alone socialist, organization would subject the campaign for war against Russia and Syria to intensive criticism and analysis, in order to educate the working class and inure it against war propaganda.

Jacobin, Socialist Worker, etc., however, are not left-wing publications. They are right-wing, pro-imperialist and pro-capitalist. In the US, they function as political auxiliary organizations of the Democratic Party, which is spearheading the offensive against Russia, the campaign against Assange, and the drive to censor the Internet.

These tendencies articulate the interests of a narrow layer of privileged upper-middle-class academics, professionals and trade union functionaries whose rising incomes over the past thirty years, even as the working class has seen its living standards collapse, have led it into direct support for American imperialism. Since the NATO bombing of the Balkans in the 1990s, the pseudo-left has supported a whole series of “humanitarian” imperialist interventions and imperialist-backed separatist and nationalist movements.”

By Tom Hall

World Socialist Website

More…

Independent Journalist Corner: A Conversation with Randi Nord Reply

By Danny Haiphong

Black Agenda Report

Independent Journalist Corner: A Conversation with Randi Nord

Independent Journalist Corner: A Conversation with Randi Nord

“Anti-imperialism to me means supporting nations in their struggle against my government’s violent and exploitative influence.”

This week I spoke with Randi Nord. Nord is a Detroit-based journalist and activist. She is the co-founder of Geopolitics Alert. Her pieces have also appeared in MintPress News. We discussed anti-imperialism and its relevancy to some of the more pressing questions of the period, especially in lieu of the ongoing US-led wars in Syria and Yemen.

DH: Tell me a little about yourself and the genesis of your political development.

READ MORE

Keith Preston: US failed to remove independent Syrian government Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

The new shift in US policy in Syria was influenced by President Donald Trump’s so-called America First policy that he has advocated since coming to office, says a political analyst.

Following Trump’s election, “America First” has become the official foreign policy doctrine of his administration, which emphasizes American nationalism and anti-interventionism.

On Thursday, Trump announced that the US will withdraw from Syria “very soon.”

One day later, Trump ordered the US State Department to freeze over $200 million in funds for recovery efforts in Syria.

Trump’s pullback from Syria  signals a new strategy amid a reassessment of the role the US should play in the conflict, said Keith Preston, chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com..

The Trump administration has realized that the US-led military campaign in Syria has failed to reach its objective of removing the independent government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Preston told Press TV on Friday.

The US has reportedly more than 2,000 troops stationed in eastern Syria, in addition to several thousand others in the Arab country’s north.

Trump has complained that the US has wasted trillions of dollars in Middle East wars, but gets “nothing” in return.

 

More…

Keith Preston: Bolton pick indicates ‘more confrontational stance with Iran’ Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

This AFP file photo taken on February 24, 2017 shows former US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton.
This AFP file photo taken on February 24, 2017 shows former US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton.

The appointment of John Bolton as US national security adviser indicates that the Donald Trump administration plans to escalate hostilities towards Iran, says an analyst.

“John Bolton has for years, even for decades, been a proponent of not only a confrontational stance with Iran but even of invading Iran,” Keith Preston, director of AttacktheSystem.com said in an interview. “Bolton has publicly advocated war against Iran.”

President Trump announced Gen. H.R. McMaster’s replacement on Thursday, making Bolton — a former US ambassador to the United Nations — his third national security adviser, part of a shake-up that creates one of the most hawkish national security teams of any White House in recent history.

“Bolton is associated with the American neo-conservative movement… which advocates very aggressive imperialist approach to really the entire world but in particular in the Middle East,” Preston told Press TV.

http://presstv.com/Default/embedattached/595477

“These were the people who were the primary architects of the war in Iraq and other disasters like that that have happened in the past,” the analyst said.

Shortly before the US and its allies invaded Iraq in 2003, Bolton reportedly told Israeli officials that once Saddam Hussein was removed, it would be necessary to deal with Syria, Iran and North Korea.

Foreign policy experts say Bolton is likely to encourage President Trump toward military confrontation with Iran.

Bolton has also called on Washington to withdraw from the 2015 nuclear agreement with the Islamic Republic, even though UN inspectors have repeatedly verified Iran’s compliance with the accord.

“There’s been far too much debate over whether #Iran is in violation of the #NuclearDeal. The point is that this was a bad deal to begin with and it’s a bad deal now and it should be torn up,” Bolton tweeted in January.

The Politico magazine revealed in November 2016 that Bolton, along with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who were then on Trump’s shortlist for key posts, accepted money from notorious Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) and lobbied for the anti-Iran organization’s removal from the US list of terrorist groups.

According to the report, Bolton “recently boasted before a MKO crowd in Paris that he had been engaged with them for a decade.”

“This is a terrorist organization that is anti-Iranian and wishes to overturn the current Iranian government,” Preston said.

“The Americans have provided support to MKO and other similar groups for that reason,” he noted. “The United States’ foreign policy establishment has no problem with terrorism as long as they can use terrorism to advance the geopolitical objective they want to achieve.”

“And one of these geopolitical objectives is to overturn the independent governments in the Middle East that are not willing to accept direction from Washington,” Preston added.

What Mainstream Media Won’t Tell You About NATO’s StratCom Reply

This includes an audio clip of an interview with yours truly.

Sputnik News

The Strategic Communications Center of Excellence, or StratCom, was established in 2014 as a response to Western governments’ concerns over supposed Russian propaganda in Eastern Europe. The center insists that it is countering Moscow’s alleged disinformation campaign, but is that really the case?

 

More…

Robert Stark talks to Keith Preston about The Geek Squad & Corporate Surveillance State Collusion Reply

Stark Truth Radio. Listen here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Topics:

FBI Paid Best Buy’s Geek Squad to Spy on Customer Devices who are Passing over User Data
Violations of the 4th Amendment which prohibits warrant-less searches based on no probably cause
Farming out state repression to the private sector as a way to get around the 4th Amendment
Motivations for informants to plant contraband
The potential use of these tactics for political oppression
Government surveillance powers over the internet
Internet Censorship and applying the 1st Amendment to Corporations
How the Left has abandoned Freedom of Speech in favor of the Social Justice paradigm
The Left’s support for the Federalization of the Police
How the Police State is now impacting the middle class
Jeff Session’s stances on civil liberties and his lawsuit over California’s Sanctuary State Status
Calexit, it’s legitimacy based on electing a new people, and the New California Movement
Trump’s foreign policy, tariffs, and his upcoming meeting with Kim Jong Un

Keith Preston: ‘The US uses its influence in NATO to exercise political control over Western Europe’ 1

A recent interview with Sputnik. Listen here.

European nations are military colonies of the United States through NATO – that’s according to Keith Preston, the director of AttackTheSystem.com. In an interview to Press TV, he said that the United States has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on European defense while also selling weapons to NATO countries. He added that Europe heavily depended on the alliance for its military defense. NATO’s military budget reached 1.4 billion last year, while member states spent some 921 billion. The U.S. has been paying nearly a quarter of NATO’s annual costs and this share exceeds contributions by other 27 members of the alliance. Meanwhile, Preston also said that the U.S. is making billions in arms sales to Europe while boosting the threat of Russian aggression.

Radio Sputnik talked about European defense and U.S. approach to its allies in Europe with Keith Preston, the chief editor and director of attackthesystem.com.