Pussy John Bolton and His Codpiece Mustache: Examining the Freak Show

By Fred Reed

February 18, 2019 “Information Clearing House” –   American government has become a collection of sordid and dangerous clowns. It was not always thus. Until Bush II, those governing were never lunatics. Eisenhower, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Obama, Clinton had their defects, were sometimes corrupt, and could be disagreed with on many grounds. They weren’t crazy. Today’s administration would seem unwholesome in a New York bus station at three in the morning. They are not normal American politicians. 

In particular they seem to be pushing for war with Iran, China, Russia, and Venezuela. And–this is important–their behavior is not a matter of liberals catfighting with conservatives. All former presidents carefully avoided war with the Soviet Union, which carefully avoided war with America. It was Reagan, a conservative and responsible president, who negotiated the INF  treaty, to eliminate short-fuse nuclear weapons from Europe. By contrast, Trump is scrapping it. Pat Buchanan, the most conservative man I have met, strongly opposes aggression against Russia. The problem with the current occupants of the White House is not that they are conservatives, if they are. It is that they are nuts.

Donald the Cockatoo

Start with the head cheese, Donald Trump, profoundly ignorant, narcissistic, a real-estate con man who danced just out of reach of the law. His supporters will explode in fury at this. All politics being herd politics, the population has coalesced into herds fanatically pro-Trump and fanatically anti-Trump. Yet Trump’s past is not a secret. Well-documented biographies describe his behavior in detail, but his supporters don’t read them. The following is a bit long, but worth reading.

From The Making of Donald Trump Johnston, David Cay. (p. 23). Melville House. Kindle Edition.

“I always get even,” Trump writes in the opening line of that chapter. He then launches into an attack on the same woman he had denounced in Colorado. Trump recruited the unnamed woman “from her government job where she was making peanuts,” her career going nowhere. “I decided to make her somebody. I gave her a great job at the Trump Organization, and over time she became powerful in real estate. She bought a beautiful home.

“When Trump was in financial trouble in the early nineties…..”I asked her to make a phone call to an extremely close friend of hers who held a powerful position at a big bank and would have done what she asked. She said, “Donald, I can’t do that.” Instead of accepting  that the woman felt that such a call would be inappropriate, Trump fired her. She started her own business. Trump writes that her business failed. “I was really happy when I found that out,” he says.

“She had turned on me after I did so much to help her. I had asked her to do me a favor in return, and she turned me down flat. She ended up losing her home. Her husband, who was only in it for the money, walked out on her and I was glad. Over the years many people have called me asking for a recommendation for her. I always gave her bad recommendation. I can’t stomach disloyalty. ..and now I go out of my way to make her life miserable.“

All that because (if she exists) she declined to engage in corruption for the Donald. That is your President. A draft dodger, a pampered rich kid, and Ivy brat (Penn, Wharton). This increasingly is a pattern at the top: Ivy, money, no military service.

Pussy John Bolton

A particularly  loathsome sort of politician is one who dodges his country’s wars when of military age, and then wants to send others to die in later wars. This is Pussy John, arch hawk, coward, amoral, bully, willing to kill any number while he prances  martially in Washington. Speaking as one who carried a rifle in Viet Nam, I would like to confine this fierce darling for life in the bottom of a public latrine in Uganda.

Pussy John, an Ivy flower (Yale) wrote in a reunion books that, during the 1969 Vietnam War draft lottery,  

“I confess I had no desire to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy. I considered the war in Vietnam already lost.” In an interview, Bolton explained that he decided to avoid service in Vietnam because “by the time I was about to graduate in 1970, it was clear to me that opponents of the Vietnam War had made it certain we could not prevail, and that I had no great interest in going there to have Teddy Kennedy give it back to the people I might die to take it away from.”

This same Pussy John, unwilling to risk his valuable being in a war he could have attended, now wants war with Iran, Venezuela, Russia, Syria, and Afghanistan. In these wars millions would die while he waggled his silly lip broom in the West Wing. His truculence is pathological and dangerous.  

Here is  PJ on Iran: which has not harmed and does not threaten America: “We think the government is under real pressure and it’s our intention to squeeze them very hard,” Bolton said Tuesday in Singapore. “As the British say, ‘squeeze them until the pips squeak’.”

How very brave of him. He apparently feels sadistic delight at starving Venezuelans, inciting civil war, and ruining the lives of millions who have done nothing wrong. Whence the weird hostility of this empty jockstrap, the lack of humanity? Forgot his Midiol? Venezuela of course has done nothing to the US and couldn’t if it wanted to. America under the Freak Show is destroying another country simply because it doesn’t meekly obey. While PJ gloats.

Bush II

Another rich kid and Yalie, none too bright, amoral as the rest, another draft dodger, (he hid in the Air  National Guard.) who got to the White House on daddy’s name recognition. Not having the balls to fight in his own war, he presided over the destruction of Iraq and the killing of hundreds of thousands, for no reason. (Except oil, Israel, and Empire. Collectively, these amount to no reason.) He then had the effrontery to pose on the deck of an aircraft carrier and say, “Mission accomplished.” You know, just like Alexander the Great. Amoral. No empathy. What a man.

The striking pattern of the Ivy League avoiding the war confirmed then, as it does now, that our present rulers regard the rest of America as beings of a lower order. These armchair John Waynes might have called them “deplorables,” though Hillary, another Yalie bowwow hawk, had not yet made the contempt explicit. This was the attitude of Pussy John, Bushy-Bushy  Two, and Cockatoo Don. Compare this with the Falklands War in which Prince Andrew did what a country’s leadership should do, but ours doesn’t..

Wikipedia: “He (Prince Andrew) holds the rank of commander and the honorary rank of Vice Admiral (as of February 2015) in the Royal Navy, in which he served as an active-duty helicopter pilot and instructor and as the captain of a warship. He saw active service during the Falklands War, flying on multiple missions including anti-surface warfare, Exocet missile decoy, and casualty evacuation”

The Brits still have class. Compare Andrew with the contents of the Great Double-Wide on Pennsylvania Avernus.

Gina

A measure of the moral degradation of America: It is the only country that openly and proudly engages in torture. Many countries do it, of course. We admit it, and maintain torture prisons around the globe. Now we have a major government official, Gina Haspel, head of the CIA, a known sadist. “Bloody Gina.” Is this who represents us? Would any other country in the civilized world put a sadist publicly in office?  

Think of Gina waterboarding some guy, or standing around and getting off on it. You don’t torture people unless you like it. The guy is tied down, coughing, choking, screaming, begging, desperate, drowning, and Gina pours…more water. The poor bastard vomits, chokes. Gina adds a little more water….

What kind of woman would do this? Well, Gina’s kind obviously. Does she then run off to her office and lock the door for half an hour? Maybe it starts early. One imagines her as a little girl, playing with her dolls.  Cheerleader Barbie, Nurse Barbie, Klaus Barbie….

Michael Pompeo

Another pathologically aggressive chickenhawk. In a piece in Foreign Affairs he describes Iran as a “rogue state that America must eliminate for the sake of all that is good.  Note that Pompeo presides over a foreign policy seeking to destroy Venezuela’s economy and threatens military invasion, though Venezuela is no danger to the US and is not America’s business; embargoes Cuba, which  in no danger to the US and is not America’s business; seeks to destroy Iran’s economy, though Iran is no danger to the US and none of Americas business; sanctions Europe and meddles in its politics; sanctions Russia, which is not a danger to the United States, in an attempt to destroy its economy, pushes NATO up to Russia’s borders, abandons the INF arms-control treaty and establishes a Space Command which will mean nuclear weapons on hair trigger in orbit, starts another nuclear arms race; wages a trade war against  China intended to prevent its economic progress; sanctions North Korea; continues a seventeen-year policy of killing Afghans for no discernible purpose; wages a war against Syria; bombs Somalis; maintains unwanted occupation forces in Iraq; increasingly puts military forces in Africa; supports regimes with ghastly human-rights records such as Saudi Arabia and Israel; and looks for a war with China in the South China Sea, which is no more America’s business than the Gulf of Mexico is China’s.

But Pompeo is not a loon, oh no, and America is not a rogue state. Perish forfend.

Nikki Haley

A negligible twit–I choose my vowel carefully–but characterized, like Trump, PJ, and Pompeo, by loyalty to Israel and wild combativeness. She seemed less dangerous than just embarrassing. Like the rest of this administration, she threatened war and retribution against any countries that did not obey the United States–not that she would put her own rounded pink sit-down ion the line n a war. That is for deplorables.

“Mad Dog” Mattis

“After being promoted to lieutenant general, Mattis took command of Marine Corps Combat Development Command. On February 1, 2005, speaking at a forum in San Diego, he said “You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn’t wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain’t got no manhood left anyway. So it’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually, it’s a lot of fun to fight. You know, it’s a hell of a hoot. It’s fun to shoot some people. I’ll be right upfront with you, I like brawling.”

Perhaps in air-to-air combat you want someone who regards killing as fun, or in an amphibious assault. But in a position to make policy? Can you image Dwight Eisenhower talking about the fun of squaring a man’s brains across the ground?  

The Upshot

We have until recently never had government as aggressive, reckless, or psychiatrically fascinating as now. Again, it is not a matter of Republicans and Democrats. No administration of any party, stripe, or ideology has ever pushed to aggressively toward war with so many countries. These people are not right in the head.

Fred, a keyboard mercenary with a disorganized past, has worked on staff for Army Times, The Washingtonian, Soldier of Fortune, Federal Computer Week, and The Washington Times.

He has been published in Playboy, Soldier of Fortune, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Harper’s, National Review, Signal, Air&Space, and suchlike. He has worked as a police writer, technology editor, military specialist, and authority on mercenary soldiers. He is by all accounts as looney as a tune. https://fredoneverything.org

Advertisements

Israel’s Crimes against Humanity Will End Just As Haley’s Tenure Ended

By Robert Fantina
Source

Nikki_Haley_Danny_Dannon_ac1d9.jpg

The United States, under the bizarre leadership of its unhinged and unstable president, Donald Trump, has finally removed the facade of any semblance of ‘balance’ in the Palestine-Israel conflict. For decades, the U.S. has supported Israel’s crimes and allowed them to happen with complete impunity. This, as its spokespeople hypocritically proclaimed the goal of a two-state solution, all the while supporting Israeli activities designed to prevent any solution other than the complete annihilation of Palestine. But with Trump, the mask is off, and the U.S. is seen as a puppet and supporter of brutal Zionism.

This has always been evident in the United Nations, where the U.S., using its veto power in the Security Council, prevents almost any repercussions to Israel for its appalling violations of international law, human rights and common decency. Oh, here and there we saw an occasional abstention, allowing a resolution to pass, but this was rare. With the rise of Trump, and his appointment of the ignorant and clown-like Nikki Haley, the fact that the U.S. is more concerned with pleasing Israel than with adhering to international law could not be more obvious.

This was seen again on December 6, when the U.S. submitted a resolution to the General Assembly to condemn Hamas, for “repeatedly firing rockets into Israel and for inciting violence, thereby putting civilians at risk”, among other reasons. While the resolution achieved a majority, it did not approach the two-thirds required for passage. Once again, the U.S. was humiliated on the world stage.

We will do something that the hapless Ms. Haley has neglected to do throughout her brief career at the United Nations: we will look at the facts.

She charges that Hamas repeatedly fires rockets into Israel. Perhaps she is unaware that an occupied people have the right under international law to resist the occupation in any way possible; nowhere are rockets excluded.

And let’s consider these ‘rockets’ for a moment. Norman Finkelstein, son of Holocaust survivors and an outspoken critic of Israeli apartheid and all that that means, including the occupation of the West Bank, blockade of Gaza and Israeli crimes in Jerusalem, calls those rockets that so intimidate Haley ‘enhanced fireworks’. He says both sides, Palestine and Israel, benefit by calling them rockets. In Palestine, it gives the Palestinian people the idea that someone, at least, is doing something to try to help them. Israel calls them rockets because doing so enables people like Haley to demand more military and financial aid and protection for Israel.

One must recall that in the summer of 2014, Israel carpet-bombed the Gaza Strip daily for nearly two full months. During this bombing, hospitals, press vehicles, mosques, United Nations refugee centers and residential neighborhoods were all targeted, all in violation of international law. During less than 60 days that summer, Israeli terrorists launched more rockets into Gaza than Gaza had launched into Israel in the previous fourteen years. Why did Haley not sponsor a resolution against Israel for repeatedly firing rockets into Palestine, thereby putting civilians at risk?

Since 2000, 134 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians. Yes, this is tragic. However, since 2000, at least 2,167 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis. The total death toll in that time is 1,242 Israelis and more than 9, 500 Palestinians. Shouldn’t Israel be condemned for putting civilians at risk?

It must also be remembered that Palestine has no army, no navy and no air force, while Israel has one of the most powerful military systems in the world, financed and backed by the world’s most powerful, the U.S. The Gaza Strip is blockaded by land, sea and air by Israel, with the criminal assistance of Egypt. The West Bank is occupied by IDF terrorists and over half a million illegal settlers who routinely commit crimes, up to and including murder, against Palestinians while the IDF looks the other way. Yet if a Palestinian teen dares to throw a stone at a tank, perhaps after seeing a family member killed, or watching his or her house demolished to make room for a new, illegal, Israeli-only settlement, he or she can be arrested and sentenced to fifteen years in an Israeli prison. Does Haley not have any objections to these behaviors?

Haley will leave her post at the U.N. at the end of the year; perhaps she grew tired of being constantly embarrassed there. On June 1, the U.S. vetoed a resolution submitted by Kuwait, condemning Israel violence in Gaza, and providing security measures for the Palestinians. After that vote, Haley submitted a U.S. resolution condemning Hamas for the violence that had erupted with the weekly ‘Right of Return’ marches, a patently nonsensical position. Video of the U.S. ambassador walking around the hall begging for votes has been widely viewed. However, her efforts were all for naught: for what is believed to be the first time in the history of the United Nations, a resolution in the Security Council only received one vote in favor, and that was by the U.S., the nation that submitted it.

Following that vote, Danny Dannon, the Israeli envoy to the United Nations, made a statement that this writer agrees with:  “Peace and stability will come to our region only when the international community is brave enough to call out the terrorists by name.” Yes, once the international community recognizes that the IDF, illegal settlers, all Zionists and members of the Israeli government are all terrorists, and does what is necessary to stop their hateful, criminal activities, peace and stability will indeed come to the region. The U.S.’s ridiculous actions at the United Nations prevent the official recognition of Israel’s crimes, but world governments, and, increasingly, the world population sees them.

Israel’s crimes against humanity will end; the people of Palestine will, one day, enjoy the basic freedoms and human rights that all people are inherently deserving of. This will not be because of any efforts of the United States; it is other governments, and people around the world, who will demand this.  It cannot happen soon enough for the suffering people of Palestine.

The Woman Who Raised Heroes

Hussein Samawarchi

This is, by far, one of the most eventful weeks for the media this year. The ongoing discussions of the speeches made at the United Nations shook the world of news analysts with praise for leaders like Presidents Hasan Rouhani [Iran] and Michel Aoun [Lebanon], and, mockery for substandard performers like [“Israeli” Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and [US President Donald] Trump. There was also the mystery roaming around the Khashoggi affair which has had everyone making speculations as to how much will Erdogan take for hushing up the matter. Mohammed bin Salman had his pilot terrorists target a hospital in Yemen and then families running away from his bombs. And, news of the execution of unarmed Palestinian protestors by Zionist forces made the headlines as well.

All of the above plus coverage of Hurricane Michael could not divert attention from two women who also made the news. They are both best known for their positions on heritage and the oppressed of the world. One defended her heritage with everything dear to her heart and the other did everything she could to deny her own. One gave her three sons and a grandson to the cause of the oppressed while the other strives to have the children and grandchildren of the oppressed massacred.

The first is Aminah Salameh who is better known as Hajjeh EUm Imad Mughniyeh; she is identified as The Mother of Martyrs. A title well deserved because of the number of times she had to attend the funerals of her beloved children who achieved martyrdom in the course of defending their homeland against the invading Zionist terrorists and their Takfiri partners who attempted to break down the last Arab country standing against imperialism.

Hajjeh Um Imad waged war against evil by educating her sons about the necessity of loving their country as much as she loved them; and, a mother’s love is so immense that the greatest poets have not, yet, been able to describe it in words. That is how much her children loved their country.
She also raised them to be proud of their identity and to defend it vigorously; the identity that derives its roots from the teachings of Imam Hussein (AS) – protecting justice and defending those who are oppressed even when the enemy is superior in numbers and arms.

But that is not the only reason why she gained the title The Mother of Martyrs. People bestowed this honor on her for the role she had in motivating others. She never allowed the loss of her beloved children to break her down. That is because she did not see it as a loss. Every time the flag of her country soared higher into the sky because of the martyrdom of one of her sons, her pride grew.

In a culture where the woman is regarded as a leader, Hajjeh Em Imad carried the banner of our Lady Zeinab (AS) with all that it signifies, from strength to sacrifice to victory.

The other woman who made the news during the same time is Nimrata Randhawa, US Ambassador to the United Nations. People may know her better as Nikki Haley.  She announced her resignation this week.

Independent news outlets are still trying to pinpoint the real reason for the decision, but talk of a corruption scandal has begun circulating. Other analysts speak of a higher role being assigned to her in the Zionist deep state that comes as a token of appreciation for her shameless public support of killing Arabs where possible. She would be prepared to win the US presidential elections of 2024 and the American public would be prepared for “Israel’s” flag to fly over the White House instead of the Star-Spangled Banner.

A lot of women choose to keep their maiden names after marriage, but Nimrata did not only drop it, she dropped the first name her parents gave her as well. She changed it to Nikki in an attempt to delete everything that links her to her real heritage. How can a person who denies her own identity be expected to uphold the identity of her country? Perhaps, that is why she is dubbed “Israel’s” Ambassador to the UN instead of the ambassador of the country paying her salary.

The two women are, indeed, at opposite ends of the ethical spectrum.

As much as it saddens the heart to see Hajjeh Um Imad leave us, something very comforting could not escape the eye when watching the coverage of her farewell proceedings. The sheer number of women, young and old, participating and paying tribute to The Mother of Martyrs can only assure us that her legacy of raising patriotic heroes will go on.

She is now with Jihad, Fouad, Imad, and young Jihad, telling them how proud she is of them and ensuring them that with so many mothers raising children like she has, victory is certain for the oppressed.

Source: Al-Ahed News

The Times Whitewashes Haley

BY Michael Howard
Source

Nikki_Haley_2_f1b6b.jpg

The decampment of Nikki Haley from Trump’s military regime is, or ought to be, a non-story. The United States’ ambassador to the United Nations is a ceremonial position that serves no purpose. The very idea of it is absurd. The US is a law unto itself, readily violating the UN Charter whenever the latter’s principles get in the way of the former’s imperial agenda. Washington didn’t bother obtaining a Security Council resolution for its invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq; nor did it get one for its bombing of, and deployment of troops in, Syria; nor did it get one for its protracted bombardment of Yugoslavia; nor did it get one for its various military operations in Yemen.

True, Washington obtained a Security Council resolution re: Libya in 2011. Resolution 1973 authorized the “imposition of a no-fly zone on Libyan military aviation” and the establishment of “safe areas in places exposed to shelling as a precautionary measure.” It also expressed a “strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity” (my emphasis) of the Libyan state. What did Washington and its NATO flunkies do? They immediately breached the terms of the resolution by relentlessly shelling Gaddafi’s security forces on behalf of the armed opposition.

While Gaddafi fled, NATO bombed his convoy. Gaddafi was captured, sodomized and murdered by a gang of “rebels.” Hillary Clinton (literally) cheered. The upshot: Libya, once North Africa’s most prosperous and stable country, became a failed state overrun by warlords and Wahhabi terrorists, and the main conduit through which all kinds of African migrants make it across to Europe. It remains so today; and Europe, in no small part due to said migrant crisis, continues its descent into political disarray.

The United Nations is useful insofar as it can provide cover for American crimes. Otherwise it’s merely a thing to be sidestepped and disregarded. It’s of no consequence who serves as the empire’s official envoy to the UN. Still, Haley’s resignation is a welcome circumstance, if only because we’ll be spared her vapid effusions going forward. This is the woman who has repeatedly cast blame on Iran for the cataclysm in Yemen, where Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have been deliberately murdering civilians, millions of whom are starving to death, since 2015—using US-made munitions. So atrocious is the Saudi-led massacre that even CNN has begun to report on it objectively. For Haley, though, it pales in comparison to the handful of rockets fired at Saudi Arabia by the Houthis, Iran’s so-called proxy.

Moral hypocrisy may be part and parcel of politics, but Haley took it to uncommon depths. When Israeli snipers mowed down hundreds of non-violent demonstrators in Gaza earlier this year, killing children, medics and journalists, Haley had this to say: “Let’s remember that the Hamas terrorist organization has been inciting violence for years, long before the United States decided to move our embassy [to Jerusalem in violation of international law]. This is what is endangering the people of Gaza. Make no mistake, Hamas is pleased with the results from yesterday.”

She went on to condemn Gazans for flying kites over the fence into Israel and asserted with a straight face that “No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has.” When the Palestinian envoy began to speak to the delegation, Haley walked out of the room. Such is her racist contempt for the victims of Israeli terrorism. She might just as well have called them “sand-niggers.”

For the record, the demonstrators in Gaza were attempting to escape what has been variously described as a concentration camp, a massive open-air prison and a human rubbish heap. In 2012 the UN speculated that Gaza would become “uninhabitable” by 2020. Last year, the UN’s leading humanitarian official in the West Bank and Gaza Strip stated that they’d been overly optimistic: for all intents and purposes, Gaza is already unlivable.

“We predicted some years ago,” Robert Piper told AFP, “that Gaza would fast become unlivable on a host of indicators and that deadline is actually approaching even faster than we predicted—from health access, to energy to water.”

Ninety-seven percent of Gaza’s drinking was is contaminated. More than half of the strip’s population is unemployed. Around half do not have enough food to eat. Almost seventy-five percent require humanitarian assistance. Gazans get around two hours of electricity per day. The healthcare system is virtually nonexistent. All this is owing to the illegal siege imposed on Gaza by Israel and Egypt. Very little is allowed in, and nothing is allowed out.

This past spring the people of Gaza made a concerted effort to break free from this living hell. They met with bullets from IDF rifles. Haley praised Israel’s “restraint.”

Nevertheless, “Nikki Haley Will Be Missed.” That’s according to—who else?—The New York Times editorial board. Why will this immoral bigot be missed? Because apparently, she’s a “practitioner of multilateral diplomacy,” as evinced by her support for the unilateral embargo on Cuba, for instance, as well as her support for the unilateral axing of the Iran nuclear agreement. She is also apparently one of a small number of former Trump regime officials “who can exit the administration with her dignity intact,” because “dignified” is certainly the word to describe her unequivocal support for the mass murder of civilians in Gaza.

Haley’s accomplishments, as told by the Times, are rather vague. For example, she is said to have “helped explain [Trump] to a world confused by the chaos in Washington. She also developed a good relationship with … the United Nations secretary general.” (This is reminiscent of the NYT’s endorsements of Hillary Clinton, which counted among her major accomplishments a speech that “criticized Arab leaders.”) Additionally, Haley “managed the effort to pass tough new sanctions on North Korea.” Why this is something for which she should be congratulated is a mystery, given that sanctions—a form of collective punishment—serve only to strengthen the target government and further immiserate its subjects, and oftentimes lead to war. And as anyone paying any attention understands, Kim’s sudden embrace of diplomacy has nothing to do with sanctions and everything to do with the fact that North Korea is now officially a nuclear state with bargaining power—in spite of the sanctions.

What else? Haley “maintained some independence from the president on relations with Russia and other matters.” In other words, like the Times, she’s opposed to improving relations with Moscow; she’d rather increase tensions and heat up the New Cold War.

Lest they come across as hagiographers, the editors gently lament Haley’s association with Trump’s “cruel” and “misguided” policies, e.g. revoking aid for Palestinian refugees and backing out of the Paris climate accord. And in a radical understatement illustrating their true degree of concern for oppressed and victimized people, the editors write that the US, and by extension Haley, have “not done enough to push back against Israeli abuses in Gaza.”

Bear that in mind when The New York Times erupts in self-righteous fury over the next “me too” revelation.

Nikki Haley No More US Ambassador to UN

Local Editor

US President Trump accepted Nikki Haley’s resignation as UN ambassador. Haley had wanted some time off and discussed her resignation with Trump last week at the White House.

In announcing her resignation, Trump said on Tuesday that Haley first broached the subject six months ago, when she told the president that she wanted to take some time off at the end of the year. Trump said that he hopes Haley will one day return to his administration, and told her “you can have your pick” of positions within it.

Haley will depart at the end of the year, and Trump said that he “will be in constant touch” with her afterwards.

“I think that it’s just very important for government officials to understand when it’s time to step aside,” Haley said on Tuesday. “The truth is I want to make sure that this administration has the strongest person to fight.”

Haley had held her post since Trump’s inauguration in January 2017. Since then, she echoed Trump’s tough line towards the United Nations, and oversaw the US’ withdrawal from the UN Human Rights Council, which she called the UN’s “greatest failure.”

After the publication of an anonymous op-ed in the New York Times in September, which described a concerted effort by officials to thwart the president’s plans, Haley denied involvement, and said that she openly disagrees with Trump when necessary.

“I don’t agree with the president on everything. When there is disagreement, there is a right way and a wrong way to address it. I pick up the phone and call him or meet with him in person,” she said. She later called rumors that officials were planning on trying to remove Trump from office for unfitness via the 25th Amendment “absurd.”

Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team

Syria: Will a New War be the October Surprise?

It’s official. The Syrian Army assisted by Russian air support is closing in on the last major pocket of terrorists remaining in the country in the province of Idlib near Aleppo. The United States, which has trained and armed some of the trapped gunmen and even as recently as a year ago described the province as “al-Qaeda’s largest safe haven since 9/11,” has perhaps predictably warned Syria off. The White House initially threatened a harsh reaction if the Bashar al-Assad government were to employ any chemical weapons in its final attack, setting the stage for the terrorists themselves to carry out a false flag operation blamed on Damascus that would bring with it a brutal response against the regime and its armed forces by the U.S., Britain and France.

In support of the claims relating to chemical weapons use, the Trump Administration, which is itself illegally occupying part of Syria, is as usual creating a bogus casus belli. U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley said in a news conference that “This is a tragic situation, and if they [Russia and Iran] want to continue to go the route of taking over Syria, they can do that. But they cannot do it with chemical weapons. They can’t do it assaulting their people and we’re not going to fall for it. If there are chemical weapons that are used, we know exactly who’s going to use them.” As with all Haley commentary, the appropriate response should be expressing wonderment at her ability to predict who will do something before it occurs followed by “Not quite Nikki.” She should familiarize herself with her own State Department’s travel warning on Syria which states explicitly that “tactics of ISIS, [al-Qaeda affiliate in Idlib] Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, and other violent extremist groups include the use of…chemical weapons.”

Setting the stage for a false flag provoked attack on a country that does not threaten the United States was bad enough, but now Washington has apparently hardened its line, indicating that any use of the Syrian Army to clear the province of rebels will “…not be tolerated. Period.” Haley again spoke out at the United Nations, saying “…an offensive against Idlib would be a reckless escalation. The regime and its backers must stop their military campaign in all its forms.” In support of its inflexible stance, the White House has been citing the presence of a large civilian population also trapped in the pocket even though there is no evidence whatsoever that anyone in Washington actually cares about Syrian civilian casualties.

And there is always Iran just waiting to get kicked around, when all else fails. Haley, always blissfully ignorant but never quiet, commented while preparing to take over the presidency of the U.N. Security Council last Friday, that Russia and Syria “want to bomb schools, hospitals, and homes” before launching into a tirade about Iran, saying that “President Trump is very adamant that we have to start making sure that Iran is falling in line with international order. If you continue to look at the spread Iran has had in supporting terrorism, if you continue to look at the ballistic missile testing that they are doing, if you continue to look at the sales of weapons we see with the Huthis in Yemen — these are all violations of security council resolution. These are all threats to the region, and these are all things that the international community needs to talk about.”

And there is the usual hypocrisy over long term objectives. President Donald Trump said in April that “it’s time” to bring American troops home from Syria -once the jihadists of Islamic State have been definitively defeated. But now that that objective is in sight, there has to be some question about who is actually determining the policies that come out of the White House, which is reported to be in more than usual disarray due to the appearance last week of the New York Times anonymous op-eddescribing a “resistance” movement within the West Wing that has been deliberately undermining and sometimes ignoring the president to further Establishment/Deep State friendly policies. The op-ed, perhaps by no coincidence whatsoever, appeared one week before the release of the new book by Bob Woodward Fear: Trump in the White House, which has a similar tale to tell and came out on Amazon today.

The book and op-ed mesh nicely in describing how Donald Trump is a walking disaster who is deliberately circumvented by his staff. One section of the op-ed is particularly telling and suggestive of neocon foreign policy, describing how the White House staff has succeeded in “[calling out] countries like Russia…for meddling and [having them] punished accordingly” in spite of the president’s desire for détente. It then goes on to elaborate on Russia and Trump, describing how “…the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin’s spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But the national security team knew better – such actions had to be taken to hold Moscow accountable.”

If the op-ed and Woodward book are in any way accurate, one has to ask “Whose policy? An elected president or a cabal of disgruntled staffers who might well identify as neoconservatives?” Be that as it may, the White House is desperately pushing back while at the same time searching for the traitor, which suggests to many in Washington that it will right the sinking ship prior to November elections by the time honored and approved method used by politicians worldwide, which means starting a war to rally the nation behind the government.

As North Korea is nuclear armed, the obvious targets for a new or upgraded war would be Iran and Syria. As Iran might actually fight back effectively and the Pentagon always prefers an enemy that is easy to defeat, one suspects that some kind of expansion of the current effort in Syria would be preferable. It would be desirable, one presumes, to avoid an open conflict with Russia, which would be unpredictable, but an attack on Syrian government forces that would produce a quick result which could plausibly be described as a victory would certainly be worth considering.

By all appearances, the preparation of the public for an attack on Syria is already well underway. The mainstream media has been deluged with descriptions of tyrant Bashar al-Assad, who allegedly has killed hundreds of thousands of his own people. The rhetoric coming out of the usual government sources is remarkable for its truculence, particularly when one considers that Damascus is trying to regain control over what is indisputably its own sovereign territory from groups that everyone agrees are at least in large part terrorists.

Last week, the Trump White House approved the new U.S. plan for Syria, which, unlike the old plan of withdrawal, envisions something like a permanent presence in the country. It includes a continued occupation of the country’s northeast, which is the Kurdish region; forcing Iran plus its proxies including Hezbollah to leave the country completely; and continued pressure on Damascus to bring about regime change.

Washington has also shifted its perception of who is trapped in Idlib, with newly appointed U.S. Special Representative for Syria James Jeffrey arguing that “. . . they’re not terrorists, but people fighting a civil war against a brutal dictator.” Jeffrey, it should be noted, was pulled out of retirement where he was a fellow with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), an American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) spin off. On his recent trip to the Middle East he stopped off in Israel nine days ago to meet Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The change in policy, which is totally in line with Israeli demands, would suggest that Jeffrey received his instructions during the visit.

Israel is indeed upping its involvement in Syria. It has bombed the country 200 times in the past 18 months and is now threatening to extend the war by attacking Iranians in neighboring Iraq. It has also been providing arms to the terrorist groups operating inside Syria.

And Netanyahu also appears to be preparing his followers for a bit of bloodshed. In a recent ceremony, he boasted that “the weak are slaughtered” while “the strong” survive — “for good or ill.” Commentators in Israel noted that the words were very close to those used by Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf in a chapter describing the historical inevitability of domination by the Aryan race. They also observed that Netanyahu, like Trump, also needs a war to free himself from his legal problems.

Taking the president, the U.N. Ambassador, the Israeli Prime Minister and the U.S. Special Representative for Syria at their words, it would appear that the Washington Establishment and its Israeli manipulators have narrowed the options for dealing with Syria and its regional supporter Iran to either war or war. Add to that the closing time window for doing something to ameliorate the Trump Administration’s panic over the impending midterm election, and it would seem that there is a certain inevitability regarding the process whereby the United States military will again be on the march in the Middle East.

By Philip M. Giraldi
Source

%d bloggers like this: