A mysterious, unseen, planetary object with a mass somewhere between that of Mars and Earth may be lurking in the outer reaches of our solar system, according to new research.
Scientists at the University of Arizona’s Lunar and Planetary Laboratory (LPL) put forward evidence that this unknown “planetary mass object” may explain why the plane of the solar system is warped in the outer reaches of the Kuiper Belt.
The Kuiper Belt lies beyond the orbit of Neptune and hosts a vast number of minor planets, mostly small, icy bodies and a few dwarf planets.
All planets in our solar system orbit around the sun on the same plane but, according to the measurements made by the research team, the most distant Kuiper Belt objects (KBOs) appear to be tilted away from this by about eight degrees.
This indicates that something unknown is warping the average orbital plane of the outer solar system.
“The most likely explanation for our results is that there is some unseen mass,” says Kat Volk, lead author of the study. “According to our calculations, something as massive as Mars would be needed to cause the warp that we measured.”
The tilt angles of the orbital planes of more than 600 objects in the Kuiper Belt were analyzed for the study.
“We expect each of the KBOs’ orbital tilt angle to be at a different orientation, but on average, they will be pointing perpendicular to the plane determined by the sun and the big planets,” Volk said.
As the team observed KBOs further out, they found that the average plane actually warps away from the invariable plane.
They noted that the chance of the warp being a statistical fluke was no more than 2 percent.
The paper also ruled out the possibility that the mysterious object could be ‘Planet 9’, pointing out that this planet is predicted to be much bigger and much farther out. Planet 9’s existence is unconfirmed, but is expected to be located at more than 200 times Earth’s distance from the sun.
“That is too far away to influence these KBOs,” Volk said.
The data does not rule out the possibility that the warp could result from more than one planetary mass object.
Details of the study conducted will be published in the Astronomical Journal.
Contributed by RT.com of RT.com.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
by Mike Adams
June 27, 2017
Fake news network CNN is reeling under a massive scandal involving three top-level CNN journalists — including one Pulitzer Prize-winning editor — who got caught fabricating completely fake news accusing a Trump associate of collusion with Russia.
“That article — like so much Russia reporting from the U.S. media — was based on a single anonymous source, and now, the network cannot vouch for the accuracy of its central claims,” writes Glenn Greenwald from The Intercept. CNN was forced to pull the story as every single “fact” cited by CNN writers unraveled and was proven to be utterly false.
The entire “Russian collusion” narrative still being desperately pushed by the delusional Left, it turns out, is nothing but “spy fiction.” It’s not just this one story from CNN that’s blatantly false, of course: It’s thousands of stories published over the last two years on President Donald Trump and his presidential campaign. Almost everything CNN publishes is rooted in falsehood or fabricated fiction that we’re supposed to believe actually came from “anonymous sources.” What CNN how demonstrates is that, inside the mainstream media, “anonymous sources” simply means “we just made sh#t up and published it.”
CNN is “no longer a news organization,” said Tucker Carlson in a widely televised analysis of the collapse of CNN’s remaining credibility. “It is a campaign with a political mission” that routinely publishes fake news to achieve the political goal of destroying President Trump and brainwashing the American public.
So far, three journalists have resigned from CNN, and a top CNN producer has even been caught on camera saying the entire Russian narrative being pushed by CNN is “bullsh#t.” (See video link below.)
Even the people who work at CNN know it’s all fake, yet they participate in the fakery by telling themselves it’s “a business,” and business is booming in the Trump era. According to CNN, it’s far more important to feed the delusional frenzy of Left-wing hatred in America than to get stories factually correct. In this way, CNN has become a journo-terrorist organization, feeding the very kind of radical Left-wing hatred and violence that recently led to the attempted mass executions of Republican lawmakers on a baseball field in Virginia.
As I wrote about CNN in November, 2016 as CNN’s fakery became apparent,
Members of the leftist media smugly claim they advocate love, compassion and progressivism, but any honest analysis of their content leads to the conclusion that their reporters are journo-terrorists. They deliberately fabricate falsehoods about their political enemies to effectively hypnotize their readers into being terrified of them. FALSE FEAR is the mantra of the journo-terrorists.
[The voters] have been programmed with so many layers of disinformation and fear that they can no longer recognize the difference between what’s real vs. fiction. They are trapped in a mental prison of fear, carefully constructed by the leftist media for the sole purpose of exerting absolute control over the psychology of the electorate.
In effect, CNN and other formerly “mainstream” news outlets have abused their power to run a full-on campaign of fake news narratives to deliberately misinform the public and achieve the political overthrow of President Trump.
But CNN is hardly alone when it comes to embarrassing retractions regarding Russia. Over and over, major U.S. media outlets have published claims about the Russia Threat that turned out to be completely false — always in the direction of exaggerating the threat and/or inventing incriminating links between Moscow and the Trump circle. In virtually all cases, those stories involved evidence-free assertions from anonymous sources that these media outlets uncritically treated as fact, only for it to be revealed that they were entirely false.
The Intercept goes on to cite totally fake news from the Washington Post, which faked a story that claimed Russian hackers had penetrated the U.S. electricity grid — a claim that turned out to be entirely fabricated and baseless. Yet the fabricated nature of the story didn’t story MSNBC from running with the false narrative, accusing Putin of attempting to freeze Americans to death during a cold winter. As Greenwald writes:
Literally every facet of that story turned out to be false. First, the utility company — which the Post had not bothered to contact — issued a denial, pointing out that malware was found in one laptop that was not connected either to the Vermont grid or the broader U.S. electricity grid. That forced the Post to change the story to hype the still-alarmist claim that this malware “showed the risk” posed by Russia to the U.S. electric grid, along with a correction at the top repudiating the story’s central claim.
But then it turned out that even this limited malware was not connected to Russian hackers at all and, indeed, may not have been malicious code of any kind. Those revelations forced the Post to publish a new article days later entirely repudiating the original story.
As President Trump asked in a recent tweet, what about all the other fake news stories CNN has published over the last two years?
It seems like CNN should be forced to issue a full retraction of almost everything it has published over the last two years.
Through revelations like these, the credibility of CNN, NYT and the Washington Post has utterly collapsed. Only complete fools believe anything they read in these fiction rags. Time after time, these publications have been caught fabricating “anonymous sources” to spin the stories they want to publish, even when those stories are knowingly false.
Rarely do the stories get retracted, and for every retraction that does take place, there are a thousand other fake news stories published on their websites that never get removed or corrected. The mainstream media has literally become the very FAKE NEWS they accused the independent media of pushing.
Yet Google, the world’s leader in “fake search” which just got slapped with a $2.7 billion fine by EU regulators for rigging search results, continues to highlight CNN, the NYT, Washington Post and other fake news pushers as “credible” news sources on Google News. Everywhere across the ‘net, CNN is still treated as if it’s a legitimate news organization, when the raw truth is that CNN has been utterly and exhaustively discredited as a fake news fiction rag… a mouthpiece for the Democrats, operating with the goal of overthrowing the legitimately elected President of the United States.
In sum, anything is fair game when it comes to circulating accusations about official U.S. adversaries, no matter how baseless, and Russia currently occupies that role (more generally: the less standing and power one has in official Washington, the more acceptable it is in U.S. media circles to publish false claims about them, as this recent, shockingly falsehood-ridden New York Times article about RT host Lee Camp illustrates; it, too, now contains multiple corrections).
Conservative radio host Sean Hannity has even called for CNN’s head honcho Jeff Zucker to be fired over the fake news. As Breitbart News reports:
Hannity made the call just hours after it was announced that three employees including the executive editor of a new investigative unit resigned after CNN was forced to retract an article connecting a Russian investment firm to associates of President Trump.
He also said he doubted the official narrative being fed out of CNN headquarters, suggesting that the employees may have been paid to resign, perhaps to spare Zucker’s reputation.
As Greenwald writes in The Intercept, CNN has become a very real threat to America:
The importance of this journalistic malfeasance when it comes to Russia, a nuclear-armed power, cannot be overstated. This is the story that has dominated U.S. politics for more than a year. Ratcheting up tensions between these two historically hostile powers is incredibly inflammatory and dangerous. All kinds of claims, no matter how little evidence there is to support them, have flooded U.S. political discourse and have been treated as proven fact.
This is why I have openly called for the investigation, arrest and prosecution of anti-America journo-terrorists operating inside fake news networks like CNN. The network is not a “news” organization; it is a propaganda front that seeks the overthrow of the U.S. government and the destruction of democracy. CNN needs to be criminally investigated for the simple reason that it continues to knowingly push vile, hate-filled dangerous propaganda that is driving America toward a violent civil war. If CNN continues on its current path, its actions are literally going to result in mass bloodshed and death, perhaps followed by an actual civil war in America.
That seems to be what CNN wants. We the People must stop their poison from harming our nation and destroying this Republic.
In the mean time, if you want to stay informed about real news, read Censored.news which aggregates top headlines in real time from the most censored independent news websites in the world.
Shattering the stereotype of the lazy pothead, new research suggests cannabis users are actually more satisfied, more successful, and even more likely to volunteer in their communities than their nonsmoking counterparts.
Last week, the Independent described to its readers how the research was carried out:
“The study, conducted by market researchers BDS Analytics, surveyed consumers and abstainers across a wide variety of mental, social and financial factors. These included life satisfaction levels, attitudes towards parenting and employment data.
“The survey analysed extensive data from two US states that have voted to legalise the sale of cannabis — California and Colorado.”
Among other surprising findings, researchers discovered that weed consumers make significantly more money than those who abstain, with Californians who use the plant earning nearly $24,000 more a year. This could be related to the fact that 20 percent of California pot consumers hold a master’s degree while only 12 percent of non-smokers in the state can say the same.
Researchers found a similar situation in Colorado, where 64 percent of cannabis users have full-time jobs versus 54 percent of abstainers. Given those numbers, perhaps it’s not surprising that weed consumers in the state generally feel better about their personal lives than non-smokers.
Marijuana consumption is also associated with healthier habits and a more active social life, researchers for BDS Analytics found. In Colorado, for instance, 36 percent of smokers described themselves as “very social people,” compared to 28 percent for those who avoid the plant. Additionally, in both Colorado and California, those who consume cannabis enjoy outdoor recreation at significantly higher rates.
Perhaps the most surprising discovery, however — given the cliched image of the slacker on the couch eating Cheetos and watching reruns of Family Guy — is that users tend to be more generous with their time. Nearly 40 percent of California’s weed enthusiasts volunteer in their communities, researchers found, whereas only 25 percent of abstainers have decided to do the same.
In a press release, head of consumer research for BDS, Linda Gilbert, says all these data points lead to a very real and increasingly apparent conclusion:
“Cannabis consumers are far removed from the caricatures historically used to describe them.”
The Iranian parliament speaker says the US and some regional states claim to be fighting terror, while they are in fact promoting it.
Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani has accused the US of playing with terrorism instead of fighting the scourge, calling for increased pressure against the promoters and sponsors of terrorist ideology.
Larijani made the remarks in an address to the second meeting of parliament speakers of Eurasian countries in the South Korean capital, Seoul, on Tuesday.
“In fact, the US strategy is playing with terrorism, not fighting it,” he said, calling on Eurasian states to “increase the costs for those promoting the ideology of terrorism and their sponsors in propaganda, political and security fields.”
He said the US and some regional states claim to be fighting terrorism, but “it is clear to everyone that they are in fact supporting the terrorists in different ways.”
Larijani also expressed dismay that “terrorism and violent extremism have turned into a devastating global threat endangering international peace and security.”
Terrorism has left thousands of defenseless people dead or wounded and made millions displaced in countries such as Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen, he pointed out.
The Iranian parliament speaker further touched on the “shameful crimes” committed by terrorist groups such as Daesh, citing the twin terrorist attacks in Tehran as an example.
On June 7, gunmen mounted almost simultaneous assaults on Iran’s Parliament and the Mausoleum of the late founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khomeini. Daesh claimed responsibility for the assaults, which killed 18 people and injured over 50 others.
Elsewhere in his comments, Larijani said the Syria crisis has deepened due to foreign interference.
Iran supports the Syrian government’s measures in its fight against terror outfits and stresses the Arab nation’s role in determining the country’s political structure, he said.
The officials also noted that coordinated efforts by Iran, Russia and Turkey within the framework of the peace process in Astana have helped reduce violence and establish a ceasefire in Syria.
Additionally, he emphasized that the Saudi aggression against Yemen has created a human tragedy in the impoverished Arabian Peninsula state.
The political and military support of some world powers for the Saudi aggression has prolonged the Yemen conflict and increased civilian casualties there, Larijani said.
The Islamic Republic believes that the military strategy in Yemen is useless and urges a halt to clashes as well as the resumption of intra-Yemeni talks.
Referring to a recent bill approved by the US Senate to impose economic sanctions on Iran and Russia, Larijani said such measures are against US commitments under international law on non-interference in domestic and international affairs of other countries.
He also underlined the need for taking retaliatory measures by the two countries’ governments and parliaments to foil the bans and prevent such “arbitrary and coercive behavior.”
“This was not a chemical weapons strike…That’s a fairy tale… He was told we did not have evidence of Syrian involvement and yet Trump says: ‘Do it’.”
Liberty Blitzkrieg’s Mike Krieger notes that part of Trump’s appeal to many of his voters was, at least ostensibly, the idea that he would employ a less hawkish/neocon foreign policy than his opponent Hillary “We Came, We Saw, He Died” Clinton.
While it’s still too early to decisively say that Trump will usher in yet another foreign policy disaster for these United States and the world, it’s certainly not looking good.
The lobbing of tomahawk missiles into Syrian based on the fairytale that Assad launched a chemical weapons attack was the first sign that Trump is easily manipulated and impulsive. In fact, the episode bothered me so much I wrote a post detailing the dire ramifications titled, Prepare for Impact – This is the Beginning of the End for U.S. Empire. I suggest taking a read if you missed it the first time, it’s my most popular post of the year.
While that was bad enough, Trump’s cozying up to the barbaric, terrorist-supporitng leaders of Saudi Arabia has been by far the most concerning aspect of his foreign policy (if you can call it that) so far. This policy has become even more dangerous now that the 30-year old princeling who is leading the Saudis’ increasingly aggressive stance in the region has been named crown prince. It appears Trump is willing to let the Saudis do whatever they want in the region, which is guaranteed to have disastrous implications for America and the Middle East.
But a new Seymour Hersh article is out showing that the US knew there was no Assad chemical attack in April, but President Trump decided to bomb anyway.
And the details are shocking… as TheAntiMedia.org’s Darius Shahtahmasebi details, never one to accept the U.S. government’s official explanation of events without question, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh has investigated Donald Trump’s decision to strike the al-Shayat Airbase in Syria in April of this year, which the president launched amid widespread allegations that the Syrian government committed a chemical weapons attack.
In a report entitled “Trump’s Red Line,” published Sunday in the daily German newspaper Die Welt, Hersh asserts that President Donald Trump ignored important intelligence reports when he made the decision to attack Syria after pictures emerged of dying children in the war-torn country.
For those of us without goldfish memories, Hersh’s recent investigation is reminiscent of his previous examination of the alleged chemical weapons attacks in 2013, detailed in an article entitled “Whose Sarin?” That article was published in the London Review of Books.
The official White House explanation for the events in April of this year was that Donald Trump was moved by the suffering of “beautiful” Syrian babies – the same Syrian babies he doesn’t want to set foot in the United States – and decided to punish the Syrian government for the attack two days after it allegedly occurred. This punishment came in the form of an airstrike despite the lack of a thorough investigation regarding what took place that fateful day in April and who was ultimately culpable (though the Trump administration insisted they were certain that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was to blame).
In that context, it should come as no surprise that Trump acted rashly without consideration of the facts on the ground. However, what is most disturbing about Hersh’s account is the fact that, according to his source, Trump was well aware that the U.S. had no solid intelligence linking the Syrian government to a chemical weapons attack — and that’s because, according to Hersh’s article, it’s doubtful a chemical weapons attack occurred at all.
“The available intelligence made clear that the Syrians had targeted a jihadist meeting site on April 4 using a Russian-supplied guided bomb equipped with conventional explosives. Details of the attack, including information on its so-called high-value targets, had been provided by the Russians days in advance to American and allied military officials in Doha, whose mission is to coordinate all U.S., allied, Syrian and Russian Air Force operations in the region.”
“None of this makes any sense,” one officer reportedly told colleagues upon learning of the decision to bomb Syria, according to Hersh. “We KNOW that there was no chemical attack … the Russians are furious. Claiming we have the real intel and know the truth … I guess it didn’t matter whether we elected Clinton or Trump.”
According to Hersh, Trump “could not be swayed” by 48 hours worth of intense briefings and decision-making following the initial reports of the alleged chemical weapons attack. Hersh, who reportedly reviewed transcripts of real-time communications, explains that there is a “total disconnect” between the president and his military advisers and intelligence officials.
As is the case with Syrian military operations, Russia gave the U.S. details of the carefully planned attack on a meeting in Khan Sheikhoun, according to Hersh’s admittedly anonymous sources. The Russians had employed a drone to the area days before the attack to develop the intelligence necessary to coordinate it.
According to Hersh’s sources, the United States and its Russian counterpart routinely share information regarding planned attacks in order to avoid collisions. However, they also permit “coordination,” a practice that involves giving the other side a “hot tip about a command and control facility,” which then helps the other side carry out their attack.
Therefore, there was no surprise chemical weapons attack, as the Trump administration alleged. In fact, Russia had actually warned its American counterpart on the off-chance that there were any CIA assets on the ground who should have been forewarned of an impending attack.
“They [the Russians] were playing the game right,” a senior adviser told Hersh.
“Russian and Syrian intelligence officials, who coordinate operations closely with the American command posts, made it clear that the planned strike on Khan Sheikhoun was special because of the high-value target. ‘It was a red-hot change. The mission was out of the ordinary – scrub the sked,’ the senior adviser told me. ‘Every operations officer in the region’ – in the Army, Marine Corps, Air Force, CIA and NSA – ‘had to know there was something going on. The Russians gave the Syrian Air Force a guided bomb and that was a rarity. They’re skimpy with their guided bombs and rarely share them with the Syrian Air Force. And the Syrians assigned their best pilot to the mission, with the best wingman.’ The advance intelligence on the target, as supplied by the Russians, was given the highest possible score inside the American community.”
Hersh confirms Russia’s account of the incident, in which Russian authorities alleged that the Syrian Air Force bombed a “terrorist warehouse,” and that secondary bombings dispersed dangerous chemicals into the atmosphere.
Strangely, if Hersh’s reporting is accurate, it is not clear why Russia didn’t give the detailed account at the time — and why the Russians didn’t emphasize that they had shared information with the U.S. military well in advance of the attack, as this would have cast further doubt on the official U.S. narrative. In that context, Russia could have provided proof of any prior communications that took place within the so-called deconfliction channel. It also doesn’t explain why Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, appeared to endorse two competing theories behind the events at Khan Sheikhoun.
However, Hersh continues:
“A team from Médecins Sans Frontières, treating victims from Khan Sheikhoun at a clinic 60 miles to the north, reported that ‘eight patients showed symptoms – including constricted pupils, muscle spasms and involuntary defecation – which are consistent with exposure to a neurotoxic agent such as sarin gas or similar compounds.’ MSF also visited other hospitals that had received victims and found that patients there ‘smelled of bleach, suggesting that they had been exposed to chlorine.’ In other words, evidence suggested that there was more than one chemical responsible for the symptoms observed, which would not have been the case if the Syrian Air Force – as opposition activists insisted – had dropped a sarin bomb, which has no percussive or ignition power to trigger secondary explosions. The range of symptoms is, however, consistent with the release of a mixture of chemicals, including chlorine and the organophosphates used in many fertilizers, which can cause neurotoxic effects similar to those of sarin.”
Hersh is not the first high-profile investigator to cast major doubts on the Trump administration’s official narrative regarding the events at Khan Sheikhoun. MIT professor emeritus Theodore Postol, who previously worked as a former scientific advisor to the U.S. military’s Chief of Naval Operations, poked major holes in the claims that the Syrian government had launched a chemical weapons attack at Khan Sheikhoun, noting the “politicization” of intelligence findings (you can access all of his reports here). Postol argued that there was no possible way U.S. government officials could have been sure Assad was behind the attack before they launched their strike, even though they claimed to be certain. Postol took the conversation even further, asserting that the available evidence pointed to an attack that was executed by individuals on the ground, not from an aircraft. Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter had similar concerns regarding the White House’s conclusions, as did former U.K. ambassador to Syria Peter Ford. The mainstream media paid almost zero attention to these reports, a slight that exposes the media’s complicity in allowing these acts of war to go ahead unquestioned.
“This was not a chemical weapons strike,” the adviser said. “That’s a fairy tale. If so, everyone involved in transferring, loading and arming the weapon – you’ve got to make it appear like a regular 500-pound conventional bomb – would be wearing Hazmat protective clothing in case of a leak. There would be very little chance of survival without such gear. Military grade sarin includes additives designed to increase toxicity and lethality. Every batch that comes out is maximized for death. That is why it is made. It is odorless and invisible and death can come within a minute. No cloud. Why produce a weapon that people can run away from?”
According to Hersh’s source, within hours of viewing the footage of the ‘attack’ and its aftermath, Trump ordered his national defense apparatus to plan for retaliation against the Syrian government. Hersh explains that despite the CIA and the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) having no evidence that Syria even had sarin, let alone that they used it on the battlefield, Trump was not easily persuaded once he had made up his mind.
“Everyone close to him knows his proclivity for acting precipitously when he does not know the facts,” the adviser told Hersh. “He doesn’t read anything and has no real historical knowledge. He wants verbal briefings and photographs. He’s a risk-taker. He can accept the consequences of a bad decision in the business world; he will just lose money. But in our world, lives will be lost and there will be long-term damage to our national security if he guesses wrong. He was told we did not have evidence of Syrian involvement and yet Trump says: ‘Do it.”’ [emphasis added]
At a meeting on April 6, 2017, at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, Trump spoke with his national security officials regarding the best way to move forward. The meeting was not to decide what to do, Hersh explains, but how best to do it (and how to keep Trump as happy as possible).
Trump was given four options. The first one was dismissed at the outset because it involved doing nothing. The second one was the one that was decided upon: a minimal show of force (with advance warning to Russia). The third option was the strike package that Obama was unable to implement in 2013 in the face of mounting public opposition and Russia’s threats of intervention. This plan was Hillary Clinton’s ultimate fantasy considering she was encouraging it moments before Trump’s lone strike actually took place. However, this would have involved extensive air strikes on Assad’s airfields and would have drawn in the Russian military to a point of no return. The fourth option involved the direct assassination of the Syrian president by bombing his palaces, as well as his underground bunkers. This was not considered, either.
As we all witnessed in April, the second option was adopted, and the airbase Trump struck was up and running again in less than 24 hours, making it a very symbolic and empty show of force.
Hersh’s insight into the way Trump is conducting his foreign policy does not bode well for the future of the Syrian conflict (or anywhere else in the world, for that matter). Trump was not interested in the intelligence or the facts on the ground — if he had been, he would have waited until an investigation had determined culpability before ordering a strike.
Missing from Hersh’s account, however, is the fact that it was newly appointed national security advisor General H.R. McMaster who laid out the military strike proposals to the president at his resort on April 6. McMaster replaced former national security advisor Michael Flynn after the latter was forced to resign due to leaks from within the intelligence community. Due to Flynn’s alleged ties to Russia, it seems unlikely he would have proposed such a strike on Russia’s close ally to begin with.
It is unclear whether McMaster proposed the strikes in order to appease Trump or because McMaster ultimately wants Trump to adopt a tougher stance against Syria and Russia; McMaster has a history of pro-interventionism and anti-Russian sentiment.
Those commentators who can review these startling revelations but still condone Trump’s actions with a lazy ‘Assad is still a bad guy and must be overthrown’ mindset argument are being intellectually dishonest, with themselves and others. As was the case in 2013, there is still very little evidence that Assad has ever used chemical weapons — particularly in the attacks that the U.S. has tried to pin on him — yet this is the standard by which the corporate media and our respective governments have instructed us to judge Assad. Even without this conclusive evidence, shortly after the April events, U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley stated Assad will fall from power.
Hersh’s investigation bolsters many claims that the U.S. acted rashly without first conducting or ordering an impartial inquiry regarding what happened in April of this year. Hersh’s report also serves as a reminder to the world of the warpath we are continuing down, spearheaded by an impulsive and reckless megalomaniac who has no interest in ascertaining fact from fiction.
* * *
Liberty Blitzkrieg’s Mike Krieger also notes that just as interesting as the information above, is the fact that Hersh had to turn to a German newspaper to publish it. This makes perfect sense, because the one area where U.S. corporate press maintains unassailable consistency is when it comes to cheerleading for an interventionist, imperial foreign policy based on unverified claims and outright lies. Trump’s little fireworks display checked all those boxes, which is why the corporate media drooled all over the bombing, celebrating Trump for the first time of his Presidency. As Hersh notes:
After the meeting, with the Tomahawks on their way, Trump spoke to the nation from Mar-a-Lago, and accused Assad of using nerve gas to choke out “the lives of helpless men, women and children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many … No child of God should ever suffer such horror.”
The next few days were his most successful as president. America rallied around its commander in chief, as it always does in times of war.
Trump, who had campaigned as someone who advocated making peace with Assad, was bombing Syria 11 weeks after taking office, and was hailed for doing so by Republicans, Democrats and the media alike. One prominent TV anchorman, Brian Williams of MSNBC, used the word “beautiful” to describe the images of the Tomahawks being launched at sea. Speaking on CNN, Fareed Zakaria said: “I think Donald Trump became president of the United States.”
A review of the top 100 American newspapers showed that 39 of them published editorials supporting the bombing in its aftermath, including the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal.
Which once again goes to show just how worthless, irresponsible and downright dangerous U.S. corporate media really is.
Finally, as Ron Paul rages below, Republicans cannot let go of “regime change” for Syria and new Cold War with Russia — even as the Democrats are starting to back away. Will the mainstream media stick with the narrative as well? Or is it all about to come crashing down?
“…one shouldn’t put one’s trust in speeches like that from the gentlemen, for on such occasions the gentlemen liked to say agreeable things, but they had little or no significance and, once uttered, they were forgotten for all time, but admittedly, on the very next occasion one got caught again in their trap.” (Franz Kafka)
With these words Kafka described the modern condition, each one of us trapped in the sticky web of technology and deceit designed to manipulate us to act and think against our selves, to accept the role of monkeys offered bananas in a cage, surrendering the struggling to escape it.
The most dangerous element of that technology is the constant and increasing flood of images of war, of “terror,” of cities destroyed, cultures erased, entire progressive socio-economic systems torn apart, or threatened with destruction, not by the “terrorists” but by the states that declared their “war on terror,” by the states that in reality created the terror in all its forms; the worst being the constant threat of instant and universal annihilation in a nuclear war.
That threat, the threat of nuclear war is more dangerous with every passing day as we see the NATO build-up along Russia’s western borders echoing the Nazi build-up before their invasion in 1941, the rolling invasion of Syria by American and allied forces, the hysterical rhetoric and military movements against North Korea, and the increasing contempt for Chinese sovereignty. Any of these threats from the United States could lead to nuclear war but the threat that concerns all of us is the one against Russia because a nuclear war with Russia is, as President Putin pointed out recently, not survivable. Yet, it is the threat against Russia that is building, building, building; increased military pressure on all fronts, increased economic warfare, called “sanctions,” increased hybrid warfare ranging from hacking of Russian computer systems, to direct attacks on Russian forces in Syria, from expulsion of diplomats to verbal abuse against and assassination of ambassadors. But the extent of the danger is to be seen not outside the United States but in the internal political turmoil that is taking place inside the United States.
Their propaganda against Russia as the “enemy” trying to destroy America through various forms of subversion is daily fare in all the mass media. The alleged subversion is stated as fact. The fact that the allegations are patently absurd means nothing when those who mould opinion refuse to say so and openly lie to the people with every word they utter. But the level of the threat against Russia is signalled by the willingness among the war faction to sacrifice anyone, no matter who they are or what position, in order to advance this propaganda. We now watch as the US Congress holds hearings in which senior government officials are called to defend themselves against charges of having had Russian connections. The President of the country is himself subject to a barrage of accusations of treason.
This scandal is not just about the bickering between the losing party in the US elections and the winning party with the losers willing to risk the security of the people of the country in a bid to take power denied them at the ballot box. There is an element of that. The war faction does want to have its finger directly on the button. Elections and democracy mean nothing to them so long as they take the power. But they could have used any scandal to try to do that. They have concocted the “Russian threat to democracy” because they want war with Russia and to convince the people of the United States and the world that this war is necessary and just, are willing to destroy even their own leaders, and their country’s democratic system, as weak and non-representative of the needs of the people as it is, in order to achieve their purpose.
The longer this spectacle in the United States goes on the worse it is going to get. But those under attack do not seem to understand what is happening to them, that they are being used to advance this propaganda, that they are being set up as scapegoats and in fact they even play along with the game, with Jeff Sessions, the US Attorney-General, today, the 13 of June, telling the US Senate Intelligence investigative committee that the accusation he “colluded” with Russia was “an appalling and detestable lie” but playing his role in this propaganda show by adding,
“that he was concerned the President did not realise the severity of the threat from Russia interference that can never be tolerated.”
The former FBI Director James Comey, a man with deep state connections, testified to the same committee that he was fired because of his investigation into the Russian allegations even though he provided no proof there was anything to investigate. Again, the facts don’t matter. The only thing that matters is the impression left, that Russia has and is attempting to subvert the United States and has succeeded in infiltrating its agents into the presidency and senior government and military levels.
To further advance this propaganda theme purges are necessary to add to the drama and we have seen Comey leave, General Flynn resign and others forced out of office or threatened with it. But the main objective of these hearings and the mass media coverage of them is to generate peoples hostility towards Russia, and this seems to be succeeding, as polls indicate. The next level of the propaganda war will be to create such an intense situation in the United States that the calls for war by the people will be the natural reaction of their outrage and, in any case, this is what the war faction and media will tell us, that the people demand action.
President Putin can meet with celebrities like Oliver Stone to correct the facts and state the truth. He can successfully dance circles around bubble headed American journalists in interviews, but he cannot control the mass media in the west that rarely allows Russian points of view to be heard. Still the attempt must be made.
The United States is in a crisis. The games being played there are dangerous for its people. The logic of the demands made by those making the allegations means that President Trump must resign or be charged with treason. If he refuses to go there will be attempts to force him. If he is forced out, the people that voted for him and support him will feel rightly cheated and they will react. And who is to replace him? It can only be one of the war faction or a puppet and if that cannot issue be resolved peacefully then the military could step in to “manage” things in a time of “threat” and “urgency.” There have been coup d’états before in the United States. We are witnessing another now.
The United States is in a crisis generated by people who have no idea how to control all the possible consequences of the events they have begun and because of this they are very dangerous to themselves and to the world. While the Russians prepare for the worst and hope for the best we in the west must do what we can to challenge the war propaganda, the propaganda of hostility and hatred that is inflicted on us by the criminals in control of the western governments and western media. Each of us is just one voice, but our voices united become a shout and with our shout we can level the walls of hostility that keep us from the peaceful coexistence that the peoples of world need to continue the struggle for economic and social justice, for real democracy, for progress, against the forces of reaction and fascism that always threaten us. Let’s not get “caught again in their trap.”
Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto. He is known for a number of high-profile war crimes cases and recently published his novel “Beneath the Clouds”. He writes essays on international law, politics and world events, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
Featured image: New Eastern Outlook