Wilkerson on North Korea Crisis: U.S. Should Stop the Threats & Own Up to its Role

The Real News Network has the interview Wilkerson on North Korea Crisis: U.S. Should Stop the Threats & Own Up to its Role

So, if you want the bottom line, there isn’t anybody in the world today, after seeing us invade Iraq, after seeing us bomb Syria, after seeing us do –- we’re at war with seven or eight countries right now in terms of drones. We’re flying across their borders and killing people inside their territory.

So, if I were anyone in the world who thought my regime was in trouble, I’d think the trouble came from the United States, and I’d want a nuclear weapon too. That’s not at all to say I condone the proliferation of nuclear weapons. I’m simply stating the obvious. I’m stating the rational obvious.

I don’t have the teeniest tiniest amount of knowledge that Colonel Wilkerson has, but I have been able to figure this out years ago.


Free Movie Plot

I have been thinking of a plot for a movie. Since I am no screenwriter, I offer this idea free of encumbrance to anyone who has the skills to turn this into an actual movie.

It starts out with a high advisor to a President Drumpf telling him that if he keeps up his anti-war stances, that he won’t survive one more week. Rather than cower into submission, Drumpf decides to go public about the threat. In a daring attempt to prevent his own assassination, he tweets the threat and names the person who made it. He then decides to cloister himself in the White House, so they can’t do to him what they did to John F. Kennedy. He then realizes that his family members are still vulnerable. He tries talking to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren who were silenced in the same way they have attempted to silence him.

The rest of the plot is going to have to be invented by whoever decides to pick up the challenge and turn it into a complete movie.


Trump’s Missile Attack on Syria Justified With Fake Intelligence, Experts Say

Alternet has the article Trump’s Missile Attack on Syria Justified With Fake Intelligence, Experts Say.

On April 7, President Trump committed his first “act of war,” attacking Syria with missiles on April 7 in response to what he said was a poison gas attack by the Syrian government that killed dozens. But the White House’s subsequent intelligence report offering its proof of Syria’s role was “false” and “fraudulent,” suggesting a “cover-up” of a president acting without any intelligence or intentionally lying to the public.

When is a U.S. President going to be held accountable for acts that violate our Constitution? If I recall, on inauguration day, it is traditional and customary for the President to take an oath that he will protect and defend the Constitution.


The Uncivil War with Max Blumenthal & Ben Norton

RT has the video The Uncivil War with Max Blumenthal & Ben Norton.

Chris Hedges is joined by Max Blumenthal, author and senior editor of Alternet’s Grayzone Project, and Ben Norton, reporter for Alternet. Following the US missile attacks on a Syrian airbase in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack, they discuss the US’ role in the Syrian conflict.


Some of you may have heard this before, but too many refuse to believe this. Many dismiss this because it comes from RT. Do you really expect this news to be broadcast by allies and co-conspirators of the U.S? If you only will listen to US government approved sources, are you really naive enough to believe that you will be getting all sides of the story?


Truth Bomb Dropped Live On BBC By British Ambassador Goes Viral

Your Newswire has the article Truth Bomb Dropped Live On BBC By British Ambassador Goes Viral.

“Trump has just given the jihadis a thousand reasons to stage fake flag operations, seeing how successful and easy it is, with a gullible media, to provoke and lead the West into intemperate reactions.


Since the first false flag operation in 2013, I have been saying exactly what the former Ambassador has been saying about the message we send to the jihadis. What I did not know at the time and did not know until recently is that Hillary Clinton’s State Department facilitated the transfer to the jihadis of the chemical weapons that we found in Libya. What did she expect them to do with these materials, and what message was she sending to them? Apparently, they have received the message loud and clear.


Why Should We Teach Critical Thinking? It Just Gets In The Way Of The Propaganda by Dr. Michael Flanagan

Bad Ass Teachers blog has the article Why Should We Teach Critical Thinking? It Just Gets In The Way Of The Propaganda by Dr. Michael Flanagan. Sounded like a great tirade, but one think caught my eye.

Or referring to the bombing of Pearl Harbor as a “sneak attack” even though the Japanese had notified FDR and declared that there was a state of war between the U.S. and Japan.

Oh, my goodness, was the movie Tora! Tora! Tora! completely wrong that the Japanese didn’t warn our government until after the attack had already started?

Following the precepts of my <sarcasm>beloved</sarcasm> President Ronald Reagan, “trust, but verify”, I decided to check out the reference that showed that “the Japanese had notified FDR and declared that there was a state of war between the U.S. and Japan.”

The reference pointed to the Telegraph article Pearl Harbour memo shows US warned of Japanese attack. This looks promising. Certainly the headline seems to make the stated point by Michael Flanagan, but wait.

But Mr Shirley said: “Based on all my research, I believe that neither Roosevelt nor anybody in his government, the Navy or the War Department knew that the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbour. There was no conspiracy.

“This memo is further evidence that they believed the Japanese were contemplating a military action of some sort, but they were kind of in denial because they didn’t think anybody would be as audacious to move an army thousands of miles across the Pacific, stop to refuel, then move on to Hawaii to make a strike like this.”

Is this the lesson in critical thinking we are supposed to learn? If you have learned anything from this post, you will follow my references to verify my telling of this. If you do, I think you will find what Michael Flanagan said was even more blatantly wrong than my excerpts would indicate.


Robert Kennedy Jr: Syria Is Another Proxy Oil War

Your News Wire has the article Robert Kennedy Jr: Syria Is Another Proxy Oil War. I couldn’t decide which excerpt to feature.

Excerpt 1

Following the second Syrian coup attempt, anti-American riots rocked the Mid-East from Lebanon to Algeria. Among the reverberations was the July 14, 1958 coup, led by the new wave of anti-American Army officers who overthrew Iraq’s pro-American monarch, Nuri al-Said. The coup leaders published secret government documents, exposing Nuri al-Said as a highly paid CIA puppet. In response to American treachery, the new Iraqi government invited Soviet diplomats and economic advisers to Iraq and turned its back on the West.

Excerpt 2

Even as America contemplates yet another violent Mid-East intervention, most Americans are unaware of the many ways that “blowback” from previous CIA blunders has helped craft the current crisis. The reverberations from decades of CIA shenanigans continue to echo across the Mid-East today in national capitals and from mosques to madras schools over the wrecked landscape of democracy and moderate Islam that the CIA helped obliterate.

Excerpt 3

Secret cables and reports by the U.S., Saudi and Israeli intelligence agencies indicate that the moment Assad rejected the Qatari pipeline, military and intelligence planners quickly arrived at the consensus that fomenting a Sunni uprising in Syria to overthrow the uncooperative Bashar Assad was a feasible path to achieving the shared objective of completing the Qatar/Turkey gas link. In 2009, according to WikiLeaks, soon after Bashar Assad rejected the Qatar pipeline, the CIA began funding opposition groups in Syria.

Finally I decided to just keep reading thie article, and not worry about choosing an excerpt.  If you really want to get an understanding of what is going on, just read the whole article yourself.


White House claims on Syria chemical attack ‘obviously false’ – MIT professor (VIDEO)

RT has the report White House claims on Syria chemical attack ‘obviously false’ – MIT professor (VIDEO).

Speaking about the US “intelligence” report, here is what the MIT professor had to say.

The report “contains absolutely no evidence that this attack was the result of a munition being dropped from an aircraft,” wrote Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Professor Theodore Postol, who reviewed it and put together a 14-page assessment, which he provided to RT on Wednesday.

Here is the video that is attached to the article.

Being a graduate of MIT, I don’t feel the need to bow down to the ‘authority” of a “respected” university. I know who some of the largest benefactors of MIT are. For instance MIT and I totally disagree on the appropriateness of their accepting money from the Koch brothers.

The point of seeing the video and reading the report is to judge the soundness of the analysis. I don’t just assume it on “credentials”. At least it seems to show that there is still some academic freedom at MIT, despite the inroads of the Koch brothers.


Bernie Sanders And “The Resistance” Slink Away On Syria

The Young Turks has the article Bernie Sanders And “The Resistance” Slink Away On Syria.

In the immediate aftermath of a military action is when principled opposition to “regime change” would really count. And the plain fact is, Sanders does not oppose regime change in this instance, and he does not oppose on principle the US being a central actor in facilitating the ouster of Assad. That’s why FiveThirtyEight characterized him as “ambiguous” and noncommittal — because his comments since Thursday give credence to the logic underlying Trump’s attack.

In a private email thread that I have exchanged with the Draft Bernie For A People’s Party, I expressed my disappointment with Bernie as the reason that I would not be working for that effort anymore. They recognized my disappointment, and agreed that they were disappointed, too. They explained that we only need Bernie to help form the new party, but we don’t need him to run for any office. I knew that already, but I don’t want to be associated with an effort that appears to endorse Bernie Sanders anymore.

I had a feeling that the right word to apply to Bernie Sanders’ stance was pusillanimous. It seems like I was right.


Ex- U.S. Intelligence Officials: Trump Should Rethink Syria Escalation

Consortium News has the article Trump Should Rethink Syria Escalation.

Two dozen ex-U.S. intelligence officials urge President Trump to rethink his claims blaming the Syrian government for the chemical deaths in Idlib and to pull back from his dangerous escalation of tensions with Russia.

Went it comes to picking a side to believe, we naturally believe the Americans who want war over the Americans who want peace. Obviously the people who want peace have some nefarious ulterior motive. The people who want war to build a pipeline through Syria have nothing to gain.

Did I need to put sarcasm flags around the above? It wasn’t obvious enough for some people?