(1) For Bolton, the Slaughter of 1 Million Iraqis is a Job Qualification (2) Trump Appointed Bolton Because Republicans Desperately Need Adelson’s Money (3) Bolton Means Another War for Israel is Coming - Philip Giraldi (4) A Warmongering War Criminal Takes the Helm of the USS Trump (5) Let’s call Bolton what he is, a War Criminal with Terrorist Ties, not just “Hawkish” (6) Jimmy Carter calls Trump's decision to hire Bolton 'a disaster for our country' 1) For Bolton, the Slaughter of 1 Million Iraqis Is a Job Qualification Tuesday, March 27, 2018, By Dahr Jamail, Truthout | www.truth-out.org Former Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton speaks to guests at the Iowa Freedom Summit on January 24, 2015, in Des Moines, Iowa. (Photo: Scott Olson / Getty Images) The illegal 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq has, thus far, left approximately 1 million Iraqis dead. That is roughly 5 percent of the total population of that country. If a foreign military superpower invaded and occupied the US and annihilated 5 percent of the total population here, that would be 16,300,000 dead US citizens. President Donald Trump's incoming national security adviser, John Bolton, still thinks the mass destruction of Iraq was a good idea. "We are confident that Saddam Hussein has hidden weapons of mass destruction [WMDs] and production facilities in Iraq," Bolton said in 2002 while he served as President George W. Bush's under secretary of state for arms control and international security. He did everything he could to prompt the launch of the US invasion -- under the pretext of WMDs that never existed. Then, 12 years later, with 5 percent of the total population of Iraq dead, thousands of US troops dead and trillions of dollars of taxpayer funds bled away, he told the Washington Examiner that he still thought the Iraq War was worth it. He even commented that "the worst decision made after that was the 2011 decision to withdraw US and coalition forces." I witnessed the carnage firsthand in Iraq. I saw the destruction of an entire country. I watched women, children and the elderly slaughtered in Fallujah by the US military. I walked through freezers full of decayed bodies that were the detritus of Bolton's US empire project. The fact that this individual is about to become national security adviser feels like a true nightmare about to revisit us. Two Peas in a Pod In their refusal to acknowledge reality, Bolton and the president are just alike. They share a disdain for anything that contradicts their fabricated versions of reality -- and they both actively work to undermine whatever happens to challenge their positions. Bolton was rightly accused of manipulating US intelligence about WMDs during the buildup to the invasion of Iraq. But that didn't slow him down. Bolton claimed, "We estimate that once Iraq acquires fissile material -- whether from a foreign source or by securing the materials to build an indigenous fissile material capability -- it could fabricate a nuclear weapon within one year." This deceitful strategy went beyond Iraq: In 2002, Bolton had his staff prepare a speech for the president that alleged that Cuba had an active biological weapons program, which was patently untrue. The lead bioweapons analyst for the State Department at the time refused to sign off on the preposterous claim. Now, he has already openly argued for attacking North Korea, and has spoken out publicly against diplomatic efforts, including the upcoming talks in May between Trump and Kim Jong Un. Similarly, Bolton has repeatedly called for bombing Iran. He has a record of favoring unilateral solutions to delicate issues such as these -- "solutions" that would almost guarantee the loss of another million lives, for starters. Meanwhile, he has consistently disparaged the UN and shown an open disdain for diplomacy, advocating military solutions at every turn. "There's no such thing as the United Nations," Bolton has said. In 1994, he also said that if the United Nations Secretariat building in New York "lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference." And let us not forget about the so-called "Axis of Evil" -- North Korea, Iraq and Iran: Bolton claims this "axis" went beyond rhetoric, and that there was "a hard connection between these regimes -- an 'axis' along which flow dangerous weapons and dangerous technology." One would think that this kind of man would have made himself irrelevant by now, and beyond disqualified for any sort of public office. But in the world of Trump, where truth does not matter -- and is often viewed as an inconvenience -- Bolton has become the perfect man for his job. We don't have to guess what Bolton's "national security" strategy would be. I saw it with my own eyes on the streets of Iraq. This time, when the US goes on the attack -- against North Korea, Iran or someone else -- there will be even less slowing it down. (2) Trump Appointed Bolton Because Republicans Desperately Need Adelson’s Money PHILIP WEISS MARCH 25, 2018 The simple truth about John Bolton’s appointment to national security adviser is that the Republicans need Sheldon Adelson’s money in order to be competitive in the coming midterms, and John Bolton is a tool of Sheldon Adelson. The appointment of course is a complete reversal of Donald Trump’s declaration during the campaign that the Iraq war – which Bolton pushed and still thinks is a great idea – was the biggest mistake ever, and he was against it from jump. But Adelson was Trump’s biggest donor during the 2016 campaign, and Trump needs Sheldon Adelson’s money to keep Congress from flipping and cutting his throat. It’s little wonder that any Republican with political ambition was quick to extol John Bolton. Politico reported in February that many of those "desperate" Republicans were trekking to Las Vegas and "gushing" over Adelson because they need him " more than ever" to try and hold on to the House this year. Confronting the potential loss of one or both chambers of Congress in the midterms, and struggling to raise money against an energized Democratic base, the party is desperate for Adelson’s millions…. That Politico article mentioned Israel only once, to say Adelson couldn’t attend the shindig because he was in Israel. It never mentioned Iran, either. But Israel is all that Adelson cares about. Yes he’s pro-choice and socially-liberal, but Adelson supports rightwing Republicans because he is an extremist on Israel. He has been pushing for One Jerusalem and an end to the peace process for 20 years– and Trump duly rewarded his biggest donor by moving the embassy to Jerusalem. Adelson has pushed for the U.S. to bomb Iran. Bolton has pushed for the U.S. to bomb Iran. Michael Wolff said it was all coming back in December 2016. From a dinner party relayed in his book, Fire and Fury: Bannon plunged on with the Trump agenda. "Day one we’re moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. Netanyahu’s all-in. Sheldon" — Adelson, the casino billionaire and far-right Israel defender — "is all-in. We know where we’re heading on this … Let Jordan take the West Bank, let Egypt take Gaza. Let them deal with it. Or sink trying." That’s just what Bolton says too. Give the West Bank to Jordan, Gaza to Egypt. The mainstream media have whitewashed Adelson’s agenda, and Bolton’s role as ventriloquist’s dummy. It’s not that they like Bolton, but they leave out the obvious connections to other powers. This analysis of Bolton and Trump’s foreign policy, by David Sanger in the Times, says that it’s now inevitable that Trump will leave the Iran deal, but it says nothing about Adelson or Israel. MSNBC hosts also ignored the Adelson angle, in a long roundtable dsecribing Bolton as a fearful choice. Chris Hayes was strong against Bolton’s Islamophobia, but he will not touch the Israel lobby angle. On Lawrence O’Donnell’s show, Wendy Sherman warns about a possible "nuclear war" with Iran– and she then says the Bolton pick is an effort by Trump "to keep his base, to try to win reelection." That’s pure disinformation. The base doesn’t want war, Adelson does. Oh and Rachel Maddow wants to talk about Russia. Russia has corrupted John Bolton. This article in the Times cites Senators Marco Rubio, Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham cheering the appointment, but it would never bring up the Israel lobby’s role in Rubio and Cotton’s political careers. Cotton only got into the Senate with help from Adelson, and $1 million from the Emergency Committee for Israel. Rubio’s career was boosted by Norman Braman, whose big worry is that Israel won’t be around in 50 years. The only place you will hear about Trump’s placating Adelson with the Bolton pick are on Lobelog and the American Conservative and Democracy Now! At Lobelog, Jim Lobe and Eli Clifton say bluntly, the choice satisfied Trump’s biggest donor. "Adelson, a huge supporter of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, likely played a critical role in Bolton’s ascendancy." At The American Conservative, Gareth Porter says that Trump’s biggest donor scripted lines in his militaristic speech to the UN last October, using Bolton as a go-between. More than anyone else inside or outside the Trump administration, Bolton has already influenced Trump to tear up the Iran nuclear deal. Bolton parlayed his connection with the primary financier behind both Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump himself—the militantly Zionist casino magnate Sheldon Adelson—to get Trump’s ear last October, just as the president was preparing to announce his policy on the Iran nuclear agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). He spoke with Trump by phone from Las Vegas after meeting with Adelson. It was Bolton who persuaded Trump to commit to specific language pledging to pull out of the JCPOA if Congress and America’s European allies did not go along with demands for major changes that were clearly calculated to ensure the deal would fall apart…. There was a time when The New York Times was frank about the Adelson connection: when Bolton was under consideration for deputy secretary of state in December 2016. [H]e enjoys a powerful ally in Sheldon Adelson, the casino magnate and Republican megadonor who favors the kind of hard-nosed posture that Mr. Bolton would bring. Mr. Adelson’s backing has gone an especially long way with Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who is expected to take on an important but still undetermined role in the new administration. But only leftwing and realist sites want to connect the dots today. The question is Why? Why won’t you see Adelson exposed as a pro-choice Israel firster who has caused Trump to flipflop on his antiwar position of the campaign? Because unlike the NRA, which any liberal Democrat proudly runs against (New Jersey governor Murphy, Jan Schakowsky , John Yarmuth), the Israel lobby is still very bipartisan. Adelson is not so different from Haim Saban on the Democratic side. They both are ardent Zionists; they both hate the boycott movement. Only Adelson buys Republicans and Saban buys Democrats. The liberal media can’t talk about Israel as a driver of our foreign policy because their own executives love Israel. David Cohen threw fundraisers for the Israeli army. Now he runs Comcast, which owns NBC. Gary Ginsberg wrote speeches for Benjamin Netanyahu. He’s a high executive at Time Warner. If these guys were working for Russians, just think of the outrage. But it’s Israel. So it’s considered impolite, or coarse, or prejudicial, to mention these connections. Though the evidence is staring us in the eyes, just 12 years after The Israel Lobby was published. Remember that Barack Obama was accused of anti-Semitic conspiracy beliefs when in fighting for the Iran deal in 2015, he dared say that only one country in the world was against the Iran deal, Israel, but it would be an abrogation of his constitutional duty to think about Israel’s interest. Now the deal is about to be rubbished by a party that is beholden to Sheldon Adelson, who has said he would rather have served in the Israeli army than the American one, and that influence can only be discussed in the margins. The stakes couldn’t be higher. Lobe and Clifton warn about a war with Iran. Adelson got his wish to move the embassy to Jerusalem, but he still hasn’t succeeded in pushing the U.S. into a military confrontation with Iran. Trump and the GOP’s biggest donor may now have installed their man in what is perhaps the most powerful foreign-policy position in the U.S. government, besides the presidency itself. As a result, the likelihood of a new U.S. war of choice in the Middle East has risen dramatically. Col. Larry Wilkerson, who regrets his role in paving the way for the Iraq war, warns that Israel and the neocons are trying to suck us into a war with Iran, and that analysis doesn’t get reported. Wilkerson is invited on to MSNBC, but not to talk about Israel’s influence. When he was running, Trump was sharp about Adelson’s money’s influence. He said that he would make Marco Rubio into "his perfect little puppet." But Trump needs Adelson’s money, so who’s the puppet now? P.S. The neoconservatives are all scrambling, trying to distance themselves from Bolton. David Brooks said he’s not a neoconservative, he’s an American nationalist. Josh Rogin says it. So does Bill Kristol, though he’s a friend of Bolton’s and has been publishing him for years. From a Krisrol podcast: [Bolton is] less interested [than neoconservatives] in democracy promotion abroad. More of a national interest first kind of guy, a little closer to Trump in that respect… John believes in a strong foreign policy, an internationalist foreign policy to be fair, a strong believer in our alliances, a strong believer in our friendship with Israel….but a little less interested as I say in the moral side, or the human rights side of foreign policy and more in the Let’s be tough for America, let’s not let international law constrain us too much. There are three reasons neocons are saying this. First, they are moving over to Democrats now, in opposition to Trump, whose nationalism scares them ( as it does many Jews). They don’t need Adelson’s money to get ahead, they have other, less-crazed pro-Israel funders. Third, they know Bolton and he genuinely scares them. Even Kristol says Bolton makes him "nervous." (But as Dylan Williams of J Street says, the difference between neocons and conservative hawks is "a distinction without a difference." (3) Bolton Means Another War for Israel is Coming - Philip Giraldi https://israelpalestinenews.org/bolton-means-another-war-for-israel-is-comin MARCH 27, 2018 Newly appointed National Security Advisor John Bolton is expected to lead the rest of Trump’s hawkish team into war. It’s just a matter of time, according to Philip Giraldi, before the US will be fighting a war in which it has no actual stake for an ally with which we have no defense agreement. by Philip Giraldi, American Herald Tribune With the appointment of leading neoconservative John Bolton as National Security Advisor, the Zionist war-party takeover of the White House is nearly complete. With Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State, Nikki Haley at the U.N. and now Bolton whispering in the President’s ear, we have a fully endowed war cabinet that will make sure the Mullahs, Russkies and Rocket Man begin to pay attention. As Haley laid down the law in the United Nations last week, “Our patience is not unlimited.” Bolton, the point man for Israeli-American casino billionaire and GOP kingmaker Sheldon Adelson, will be the spark plug that ignites a new round of warfare on behalf of Israel. Bolton has long been planning to attack Iran. He secretly and illegally met with Israel’s Mossad intelligence service in 2003-4 when he was in the State Department under George W. Bush to lay the groundwork for such a conflict. Today, right-wing Israelis are certainly cheering his appointment. Naftali Bennett, a member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s security cabinet, has already praised the move, calling Bolton “an extraordinary security expert, experienced diplomat and a stalwart friend of Israel”. War is likely to start in the Middle East as Iran, Lebanon and Syria are relatively soft targets with only limited capability to strike back. As neocon pundit Michael Ledeen put it put it, Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business. There have been numerous indications that Israel is preparing for war. Its planning clearly includes deliberately involving the United States in the conflict, making turning American soldiers into de facto hostages, with U.S. casualties guaranteeing Washington’s direct and immediate involvement in the fighting. Largely unknown to the American public, the United States has just completed the largest ever joint military exercises with Israel even though it has no defense agreement or treaty with Tel Aviv. That is, in part, because military alliances are dependent on an attack on one partner mandating support from all parties to the agreement. Israel has balked at such an arrangement because it cannot define its own borders, which are constantly expanding. IDF and US Army Celebrate Success of Joint Training Exercise The recent maneuvers featured scenarios in which U.S. troops fought Syrians, Lebanese and Palestinians in a mock-up Arab village to defend Israel. Washington’s particularly vulnerability vis-à-vis Israel derives from the recent opening of a U.S. permanent facility at Mashabim Air Base in the Negev Desert. It is described as a base within a base, completely contained by an Israeli air force installation and operating “under Israeli military directives,” meaning that if the facility is attacked Americans will likely die. It has no function in support of U.S. regional interests but is instead a shell facility with a few dozen airmen that can be ramped up considerably if Israel goes to war and calls for American assistance. Together with billions of dollars-worth of U.S. military equipment that is pre-positioned in Israel and can be used by the Israelis as needed, it is all about supporting Israeli war-making and has nothing to do with American security or defense interests except as a tripwire to bring about U.S. involvement. For that reason, all of the above is something more than just the latest “we have to support Israel” gimmick. The American soldiers and airmen who are now based in Israel are the sacrificial lambs that will guarantee U.S. entry into a war that Israel intends to start, make no mistake about that. A group of U.S. Senators who have just returned from Israel have confirmed that Netanyahu’s government is preparing for a major regional war. Their recommendation? Give Israel more money so it can “defend” itself, a proposal that might be well received in the White House, which is also itching to confront both Syria and Iran. In addition to Bolton, Secretary of Defense James Mattis, former National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster and the President himself have all been particularly ratcheting up the rhetoric against Iran. At the U.N., Nikki Haley betrayed her ignorance of international law and the U.N. Charter, recently warning that the U.S. is prepared to attack Syria again because “…there are times when states are compelled to take their own action.” When Israel attacks Syria and/or Lebanon, as it clearly intends to do, Hezbollah will retaliate with its missiles, some of which will surely be directed towards the Mashabim Air Base, which will be targeted to inhibit the base’s ability to bomb Lebanon. And once Washington is well and truly engaged in what is referred to as “force protection,” Israel will undoubtedly widen the conflict by drawing Iran in through attacks on that country’s identified bases in Syria that are supporting the al-Assad regime. The bigger war will suddenly become America’s responsibility after Israel inevitably proves itself incapable of handling the escalation. During the recent bilateral military exercises, Air Force Lieutenant General Richard Clark enthused that American soldiers are “prepared to die for the Jewish state” and also added that they would “probably” be under the command of Israeli Air Force General Zvika Haimovitch, who would decide on the involvement of U.S. personnel. Haimovitch commented “I am sure…we will find US troops on the ground…to defend the state of Israel.” I somehow doubt if General Richard Clark would be so sanguine if his own son were told to prepare to die for the Jewish state. And I have to wonder if the good general has considered Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution about declaring war or the 1973 War Powers Act or the issue of national sovereignty itself in allowing another country to declare war for you. General Clark is a perfect example of how we have been sold out by the people we have honored and rewarded to defend our country when it comes to pandering to Israel. He and Bolton as well as the other Administration hawks clamoring for more war for Israel are a national disgrace. (4) A Warmongering War Criminal Takes the Helm of the USS Trump From: Sadanand, Nanjundiah (Physics and Engineering Physics) [mailto:sadanand@ccsu.edu] To: Sent: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 15:28:18 +0000 Subject: https://organizingupgrade.com/warmongering-war-criminal-takes-helm-uss-trump/ March 24, 2018 On this one there is no ambiguity. Trump’s naming John Bolton as National Security Adviser is a clear declaration that Washington will intensify its current wars and do its best to start new and bigger ones. The headline on Middle East expert Juan Cole’s assessment didn’t mince words: “Let’s call Bolton what he is, a War Criminal with Terrorist Ties, not just ‘Hawkish'” Cole writes: “John Bolton helped lie our country into an illegal war of aggression that killed several hundred thousand Iraqis, wounded over a million, and displaced 4 million from their homes, helped deliver Baghdad into the hands of Iran, and helped create ISIL, which blew up Paris. In a just world, Bolton would be on trial at The Hague for war crimes. Instead, he has been promoted into a position to do to Iran what he did to Iraq.” (Full text is here.) The more that comes out about Bolton’s background and views, the more frightening his appointment is. Phyllis Bennis, Director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies, fills in the details and recounts her own 1994 debate with Bolton here, Videos of four Bolton statements that earned him his ultra-hardline reputation can be viewed on YouTube here. David Lefcourt, author of “How the Moneyed Interests Have Stolen America,” writes on Op-Ed news: “This is like putting an NRA stooge in charge of policing an anti-war rally. Armed and ready to take out any protester.” (Full opinion piece here) A statement issued by from World Beyond War Director David Swanson says Bolton’s nomination is even more extreme than Trump’s week before choice of ultra-hawk Mike Pompeo to be Secretary of State and nomination of torturer Gina Haspel to direct the CIA: “Trump [had] just nominated an advocate of overthrows, religious wars, and strenuous avoidance of peace to head the State Department [Pompeo], and simultaneously found someone even worse, a sadistic torturer, to nominate for the top job at the CIA [Haspel]. How do you top that? With the appointment of an unrepentant Iraq war promoter who claims that attacking North Korea would be ‘legal’…” (Full statement here.) On Alternet, Mehreen Kasana details the ways that “John Bolton Unabashedly Peddles Islamophobic Fake News.” (Full text here.) And the New York Times, writing from its vantage point as sober defender of the long range interests of the U.S. ruling class, sounded an immediate alarm with a major editorial titled “Yes, John Bolton Really Is That Dangerous.” The Times writes: “Mr. Bolton told Fox News earlier this month that talks would be worthless and has called South Korean leaders “putty in North Korea’s hands.” On February 28, he insisted in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that “it is perfectly legitimate for the United States to respond to the current ‘necessity’ posed by North Korea’s nuclear weapons by striking first.” (Full text of the editorial is here.) (5) Let’s call Bolton what he is, a War Criminal with Terrorist Ties, not just “Hawkish” https://www.juancole.com/2018/03/criminal-terrorist-hawkish.html By Juan Cole | Mar. 23, 2018 | John Bolton helped lie our country into an illegal war of aggression that killed several hundred thousand Iraqis, wounded over a million, and displaced 4 million from their homes, helped deliver Baghdad into the hands of Iran, and helped create ISIL, which blew up Paris. In a just world, Bolton would be on trial at the Hague for war crimes. Instead, he has been promoted into a position to do to Iran what he did to Iraq. He is also in the back pocket of the MEK Iranian terrorist organization, which despite its violent and smelly past has proved so useful to those plotting the apocalyptic destruction of Iran that the Washington elite decided to take it off the list of terrorist organizations in 2012. [...] (6) Jimmy Carter calls Trump's decision to hire Bolton 'a disaster for our country' Jimmy Carter calls Trump's decision to hire Bolton 'a disaster for our country' Susan Page, USA TODAY Published 3:26 p.m. ET March 26, 2018 | Updated 5:33 p.m. ET March 26, 2018 NEW YORK — Former president Jimmy Carter, one of the few U.S. officials who has traveled to North Korea and met with its leaders, expresses hope for the planned White House summit with Pyongyang but warns that President Trump may have made “one of the worst mistakes” of his tenure by naming John Bolton to the sensitive post of national security adviser. In an exclusive interview with USA TODAY, pegged to the publication of his new book titled Faith, Carter calls Bolton “a warlike figure” who backs policies the former president calls catastrophic. “Maybe one of the worst mistakes that President Trump has made since he’s been in office is his employment of John Bolton, who has been advocating a war with North Korea for a long time and even an attack on Iran, and who has been one of the leading figures on orchestrating the decision to invade Iraq,” Carter said. He called the appointment, announced last week, “a disaster for our country.” -- |
Archives >