Connect with us
//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Latest

WATCH: Syrian President Assad explains the REAL reason why he’s still in power

Assad stays in power because he has popular support

Avatar

Published

on

We have constantly heard from the West “Assad must go! Assad must go!”, and yet he remains. The Western narrative about Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad literally contradicts itself if you think about it:

There is a brutal dictator who is killing his own people, and the whole world is against him save for a few countries, and his people totally hate him because he is killing them, yet his army is the largest in the nation and they are winning the war…somehow. And despite the world and his people being allegedly against him, he remains in power…despite the odds.

That is the western narrative. The simple reality is, no one could survive, let alone remain in power against such odds, without the support of the people. And Assad has that support, the support of Syria and her people.

In this video, President Assad explains in his own words, why that is, how he remains in power, and talks briefly about Russia’s role. It is very interesting hearing him break down the western narrative levied against him and the Syrian people in his own calm, collected, and articulate words.

Assad explains in the video, how if the western narrative about him were true, if he was really despised by his entire people, he simply could not remain in power. While there can exist evil dictators in the world, there must always be some form of popular support for almost anyone to remain in power against any form of resistance for a prolonged period of time.

The illusion of “The Evil Dictator” must be dispelled, because it’s a crucial component of the way the Zionist powers justify their global war against the free peoples. What do I mean by this?

The West loves to create Black and White juvenile fantasy narratives, there are “The Good Guys” (NATO, Israel, and friends), and the Bad Guys (anyone who doesn’t worship “Western Democracy and Values”). All the good guys are always good, even if in reality they’re brutal dictators, and all the bad guys are always evil, even if they have the support of their people.

This is an example of the type of people you can see supporting Assad in Syria…

These narratives are absolutely necessary for invaders to justify their military interventionism. They can’t come right out and say: “We’re invading this country because they won’t obey us.”, so instead, they must invent a reason to invade which doesn’t make them look like imperialist conquerors.

Thus, they label someone an evil dictator, and all of the sudden, they may now begin a “carpet bombing for world peace” campaign. But the most important aspect of labeling someone an evil dictator is to say they do not have the support if their own people.

It’s very common to see Syrian Orthodox Christian Bishops supporting Assad

This isn’t the Middle Ages, it’s no longer socially acceptable to run around conquering countries because you don’t like the leaders…or rather…conqourers aren’t so honest about their true intentions anymore, as they were in ages past, and they must now justify their actions.

These people…however, are the types of people who show up to ANTI-Assad rallies. These are the people who DON’T support him, and fight him, and receive funds from the US and their allies. Notice the flag of the French Mandate as well as Al-Queda style flags

It’s a lot easier to justify regime change if you claim everyone hates the regime…but think…honestly think…is it really possible for a regime to exist which is truly hated (to the level the West implies Assad is hated) by even 80% of the country?

The reality is…no…to remain in power for so long, some form of popular support is a must. The support can come from various factors, fear of the unknown, a “lesser of two evils”, ignorance or apathy for politics, nationalism, genuine love, but all governments need public support.

Syrians supporting Assad, Russia, and Putin. Note the difference between them and the “moderate” decapitators further above. Heavily armed terrorist psychopaths vs unarmed peaceful civilians. According to the west, THESE people are the problem, not the terrorists whom they arm.

Even if their excuse is that Assad stays in power via the army – the army is still made up of normal human beings with hearts, and souls, and family members that they love. The army is not made of emotionless robots, but the army itself is made up of the people, and the Syrian Army is a diverse group of Syrian Citizens ranging from Sunni Muslims, to Christians, and even the occasional Syrian Jew.

These women support Assad and fight with the Syrian Army – you won’t see women with uncovered hair running and gunning with the “Syrian” Rebels. They believe women are roughly equal to cattle, unlike the Syrian leaders.

When a person joins the army, they don’t magically cease to be a member of the people. While rule through fear is possible…fear of what? Death? People are already dying in Syria…there is a war waging. You can’t threaten the entire country and population with death, such methods only work against a people with an implied threat…once the actual fighting starts, there is no more implied threat.

The other narrative the West uses, is that Russia is the only thing keeping Assad in power. While that has helped save Syria, that is not the only reason Assad is in power. In the video, he pointed out how the Shah of Iran had the total support of the US, but he still fell when the people turned against him. Would the US imply that the support of Russia is stronger than the support of the US? The Shah fell because he lost the support of the people.

When the US invaded Vietnam, they fought for years in a complex war, they were engaged in a scale far greater than Russia was in Syria, and yet they still failed. Why? Because they did not have the support of the Vietnamese people.

The truth is, there are very few nations in the world, if any, where there is not some form of popular support, at least enough to prevent a violent revolution. And this is not meant to imply that there are no brutal leaders in the world, nor that popular support guarantees a leader or policy is good, merely that these issues are more complicated than it seems.

The topic of whether or not “the people” can be wrong, is altogether another one, which can shake the foundations of faith in democracy. Hitler’s Nazi Germany is an example of a situation in which…while yes, there was oppressed opposition, however, there still was a frighteningly large amount of public support, and the masses chose an evil future for themselves.

Considering how that happened is a sobering event, which requires inward contemplation about human nature. Nazi Germany wasn’t created by Satan magically, the Devil is not known for his creativity; it was humans which permitted that to happen, and “civilized Europe” is letting it happen again in Ukraine.

It shows us that indeed, humans can make evil decisions which are not the act of evil dictators alone, which we dehumanize, but regular people can simply give their passive support to destructive regimes like Nazi Germany. All it takes for evil to succeed is for regular people to say “Моя хата з краю” (it’s none of my business).

This too is possible, which is why I described this Black and White view of the world as a juvenile fantasy narrative. Indeed, there is true Good, and true Evil, I do not believe in moral relativism, but humans tend to fall anywhere in between on that scale, and its shocking how much evil can come from the most simple of sources. We should not be so quick to pass judgments on people, moreover, powers like NATO should not run around the world accusing others of war crimes when they commit and tolerate them at will.

Sometimes Good people can do bad things, which doesn’t make them as a whole evil, and sometimes evil people can do good things, which does not totally justify them.

Dostoyevsky, in fact, said, that the majority of evil people are in fact far more naive than we realize.

It would be naive to assume the West can simply step into a conflict in an ancient country with a little regime change, and all will be well.

Russian people experienced this first hand, when a foreign ideology was imported into the Motherland, and the divinely anointed Russian Czar was murdered by evil men, bringing the curse of regicide, and a sea of blood upon long-suffering Russia.

The word Bolshevik even comes from the word “majority”, and while it can not be said that the majority of Russians support the Bolsheviks, they still seized power and ruled Russia none the less. It was also during the Soviet era, when the people rose together and saved the world from Nazism, and slowly, the Russian Faith bloomed again, so it’s hard to look at these events in human history with the simplistic frame the West applies to everything.

It is this simplistic style of framing the West uses which is designed to gain that all to precious public support from otherwise ignorant and apathetic citizens.

While Americans may not understand too well the cultures of the world in their complexity, the reality is, these situations are truly ancient issues which must be solved by the people living in the country in question, with the possible help of close neighbors – like Russia.

Why does Assad remain in power? Simple, because its the choice of the people, and honestly, unless you are a Syrian citizen, that is all you need to know. The internal politics of Syria remain an issue for the Syrian people, not for western foreigners to judge what will be a good future path for them.

Ultimately, only the Syrian people can truly create a lasting future for Syria, because whatever the future in Syria will be, and whatever or whoever will go, come, or stay, they must live with that future.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement //pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
13 Comments

13
Leave a Reply

avatar
12 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
13 Comment authors
AM Hantstibetan cowboytomRastislav Veľká MoravaMichael McTague Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
AM Hants
Guest
AM Hants

Something many leaders will never have.

tibetan cowboy
Guest
tibetan cowboy

Assad is right up there with Putin and Xi as world class leaders of their people and nations. How he can be so impressive even after 7 years of destruction of his nation and people by the USA is astounding. To weather the incredible war crimes levied against him and his people by Israel and the USA require near sainthood. But instead, he’s humble and gently well-spoken, a wonderful person. We have NO such politician in the USA that I know of: no leaders, no politicians with either courage or honesty. The USA is not only bankrupt economically but worse:… Read more »

tom
Guest
tom

The ironic aspect of all this is that, in the West, no one who has the support of the people and who works for their benefit can ever attain power. Such people are carefully screened out long before the candidate stage.

As usual, Western governments and their media “echoes” are not content with merely lying – they prefer to turn the truth upside down and inside out.

It is not Syria, or Iran, or China, or Russia that is a dictatorship ruled by a ruthless oligarchy who care nothing about the common folk.

It is the USA and its catamites.

Michael McTague
Guest
Michael McTague

Fuck the Nuland family, a bunch of Zionistas who hijacked the state department and should be on trial for treason. I’m so fed up with americans paying no attention and zionistas taking over every institution.

Rastislav Veľká Morava
Guest
Rastislav Veľká Morava

Beautiful!

GET REAL WILL YA
Guest
GET REAL WILL YA

per tibetan cowbow below, putinstein is part of the jew punch and judy show, the huge khazarian fraud statesman who’s jewish blood is not mentioned ever, nor the fact he signed into law a bill that makes denial of the HOLLOW HOAX in Russia an ‘imprisonable offense’ now. Such a tool of the Rothschilds as he is, means that many dupes like the guy below here fail to grasp that the khazarian mafia runs the fake opposition. if Putin were really on Syria’s side he would have blown the friggin US NAVY ships OUT OF THE WATER for launching tomahawk… Read more »

Fielding Mellish
Guest
Fielding Mellish

can’t Mossad the Assad! God bless the man.

Occams
Guest
Occams

Of course no Rothschild bank, no US gas pipeline, and a supply of oil couldn’t possibly have anything to do with his being “an evil, murderous dictator, now could it?

Jonathan Stern
Guest
Jonathan Stern

The US is number one in oil . The bank ? Assad is an evil murderous dictator. He has killed FAR more than that corrupt creep Netanyahoo. But of course when Assad is slaughtering is okay with you.

When enemies of the US mass kill you are okay with it .
When enemies of Israel are okay with it you are okay with it.

So it is not slaughter or killing that interests you, is it?

Interesting.

james
Guest
james

Many, who seem to be opposed to the Western terrorist proxy war against Syria, unfortunately, do not challenge the BIG LIE that President Bashar al-Assad is a corrupt brutal dictator. [1] In fact, as this 53 minute press conference of 19 June 2014 at the United Nations New York headquarters: https://candobetter.net/SyriansVotedForPresidentBasharAlAssad … shows, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has vastly more legitimacy than any of the leaders of any of the countries that are hostile to his government. These countries include Britain, the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Sweden and Germany. Note that no ‘reporter’ who, elsewhere peddles the narrative… Read more »

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

comment image comment image comment image

Mordaz
Guest
Mordaz

Great article, except for the ridiculous “divinely anointed Russian Czar” bit. Fits well with the usual anticommunist blabber I’ve come to expect from The Duran.

Gano1
Guest
Gano1

People always forget that 200,000 SAA soldiers have died, Assad did not kill them, also 80% of the population went to live in Assad controlled areas not ISIS controlled areas!.

Latest

VIPS Fault Mueller Probe, Criticize Refusal to Interview Assange

The bug in Mueller’s report released on Thursday is that he accepts that the Russian government interfered in the election. Trump should challenge that, says VIPS.

Consortium News

Published

on

Via ConsortiumNews.com:


MEMORANDUM FOR: The President

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT: The Fly in the Mueller Ointment

April 16, 2019

Mr. President:

The song has ended but the melody lingers on. The release Thursday of the redacted text of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s “Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election” nudged the American people a tad closer to the truth on so-called “Russiagate.”

But the Mueller report left unscathed the central-but-unproven allegation that the Russian government hacked into the DNC and Podesta emails, gave them to WikiLeaks to publish, and helped you win the election. The thrust will be the same; namely, even if there is a lack of evidence that you colluded with Russian President Vladimir Putin, you have him to thank for becoming president. And that melody will linger on for the rest of your presidency, unless you seize the moment.

Mueller has accepted that central-but-unproven allegation as gospel truth, apparently in the lack of any disinterested, independent forensic work. Following the odd example of his erstwhile colleague, former FBI Director James Comey, Mueller apparently has relied for forensics on a discredited, DNC-hired firm named CrowdStrike, whose credibility is on a par with “pee-tape dossier” compiler Christopher Steele. Like Steele, CrowdStrike was hired and paid by the DNC (through a cutout).

We brought the lack of independent forensics to the attention of Attorney General William Barr on March 13 in a Memorandum entitled “Mueller’s Forensic-Free Findings”, but received no reply or acknowledgement. In that Memorandum we described the results of our own independent, agenda-free forensic investigation led by two former Technical Directors of the NSA, who avoid squishy “assessments,” preferring to base their findings on fundamental principles of science and the scientific method. Our findings remain unchallenged; they reveal gaping holes in CrowdStrike’s conclusions.

We do not know if Barr shared our March 13 Memorandum with you. As for taking a public position on the forensics issue, we suspect he is being circumspect in choosing his battles carefully, perhaps deferring until later a rigorous examination of the dubious technical work upon which Mueller seems to have relied.

Barr’s Notification to Congress

As you know, the big attention-getter came on March 24 when Attorney General William Barr included in his four-page summary a quote from Mueller’s report: “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” Understandably, that grabbed headlines — the more so, since most Americans had been convinced earlier by the media that the opposite was true.

There remains, however, a huge fly in the ointment. The Mueller report makes it clear that Mueller accepts as a given — an evidence-impoverished given — that the Russian government interfered in the election on two tracks:

Track 1 involves what Barr, echoing Mueller, claims “a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA)” did in using social media “to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election.” A careful look at this allegation shows it to be without merit, despite Herculean efforts by The New York Times, for example, to put lipstick on this particular pig.  After some rudimentary research, award winning investigative reporter Gareth Porter promptly put that pig out of its misery and brought home the bacon. We do not believe “Track 1” merits further commentary.

Track 2 does need informed commentary, since it is more technical and — to most Americans — arcane. In Barr’s words: “The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election.”

We are eager to see if Mueller’s report contains more persuasive forensic evidence than that which VIPS has already debunked. In Barr’s summary, the only mention of forensics refers to “forensic accountants” — a far cry from the kind of forensic investigators needed to provide convincing proof of “hacking” by the Russian government.

But They Were Indicted!

Circular reasoning is not likely to work for very long, even with a U.S. populace used to being brainwashed by the media. Many Americans had mistakenly assumed that Mueller’s indictment of Russians — whether they be posting on FaceBook or acting like intelligence officers — was proof of guilt. But, as lawyers regularly point out, “one can easily indict a ham sandwich” — easier still these days, if it comes with Russian dressing.

Chances have now increased that the gullible folks who had been assured that Mueller would find collusion between you and Putin may now be a bit more circumspect — skeptical even — regarding the rest of the story-line of the “Russian hack,” and that will be even more likely among those with some technical background. Such specialists will have a field day, IF — and it is a capital “IF” — by some miracle, word of VIPS’ forensic findings gets into the media this time around.

The evidence-impoverished, misleadingly labeled “Intelligence Community Assessment” of January 6, 2017 had one saving grace. The authors noted: “The nature of cyberspace makes attribution of cyber operations difficult but not impossible. Every kind of cyber operation — malicious or not — leaves a trail.” Forensic investigators can follow a trail of metadata and other technical properties. VIPS has done that.

A “High-Class Entity?”

If, as we strongly suspect, Mueller is relying for forensics solely on CrowdStrike, the discredited firm hired by the DNC in the spring of 2016, he is acting more in the mold of Inspector Clouseau than the crackerjack investigator he is reputed to be. It simply does not suffice for Mueller’s former colleague James Comey to tell Congress that CrowdStrike is a “high-class entity.” It is nothing of the sort and, in addition to its documented incompetence, it is riddled with conflicts of interest. Comey needs to explain why he kept the FBI away from the DNC computers after they were said to have been “hacked.”

And former National Intelligence Director James Clapper needs to explain his claim last November that “the forensic evidence was overwhelming about what the Russians had done.” What forensic evidence? From CrowdStrike? We at VIPS, in contrast, are finding more and more forensic evidence that the DNC emails were leaked, not hacked by the Russians or anyone else — and that “Guccifer 2.0” is an out-and-out fraud. Yes, we can prove that from forensics too.

But the Talking Heads Say …

Again, if Mueller’s incomplete investigation is allowed to assume the status of Holy Writ, most Americans will continue to believe that — whether you colluded the Russians or not — Putin came through for you big time. In short, absent President Putin’s help, you would not be president.

Far too many Americans will still believe this because of the mainstream-media fodder — half-cooked by intelligence leaks — that they have been fed for two and a half years. The media have been playingthe central role in the effort of the MICIMATT (the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank) complex to stymie any improvement in relations with Russia. We in VIPS have repeatedly demonstrated that the core charges of Russian interference in the 2016 election are built on a house of cards. But, despite our record of accuracy on this issue — not to mention our pre-Iraq-war warnings about the fraudulent intelligence served up by our former colleagues — we have gotten no play in mainstream media.

Most of us have chalked up decades in the intelligence business and many have extensive academic and government experience focusing on Russia. We consider the issue of “Russian interference” of overriding significance not only because the allegation is mischievously bogus and easily disproven. More important, it has brought tension with nuclear-armed Russia to the kind of dangerous fever pitch not seen since the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, when the Russian provocation was real — authentic, not synthetic.

Sober minds resolved that crisis more than a half-century ago, and we all got to live another day. These days sober minds seem few and far between and a great deal is at stake. On the intelligence/forensics side, we have proved that the evidence adduced to “prove” that the Russians hacked into the DNC and Podesta emails and gave them to WikiLeaks is spurious. For example, we have examined metadata from one key document attributed to Russian hacking and shown that it was synthetically tainted with “Russian fingerprints.”

Who Left the Bread Crumbs?

So, if it wasn’t the Russians, who left the “Russian” bread-crumb “fingerprints?” We do not know for sure; on this question we cannot draw a conclusion based on the principles of science — at least not yet. We suspect, however, that cyber warriors closer to home were responsible for inserting the “tell-tale signs” necessary to attribute “hacks” to Russia. We tacked on our more speculative views regarding this intriguing issue onto the end of our July 24, 2017 Memorandum to you entitled “Intelligence Veterans Challenge Russia Hack Evidence.”

We recall that you were apprised of that Memorandum’s key findings because you ordered then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo to talk to William Binney, one of our two former NSA Technical Directors and one of the principal authors of that Memorandum. On October 24, 2017, Pompeo began an hour-long meeting with Binney by explaining the genesis of the odd invitation to CIA Headquarters: “You are here because the president told me that if I really wanted to know about Russian hacking I needed to talk to you.”

On the chance Pompeo has given you no report on his meeting with Binney, we can tell you that Binney, a plain-spoken, widely respected scientist, began by telling Pompeo that his (CIA) people were lying to him about Russian hacking and that he (Binney) could prove it. Pompeo reacted with disbelief, but then talked of following up with the FBI and NSA. We have no sign, though, that he followed through. And there is good reason to believe that Pompeo himself may have been reluctant to follow up with his subordinates in the Directorate of Digital Innovation created by CIA Director John Brennan in 2015. CIA malware and hacking tools are built by the Engineering Development Group, part of that relatively new Directorate.

Obfuscation’

A leak from within the CIA, published on March 31, 2017 by WikiLeaks as part of the so-called “Vault 7” disclosures, exposed a cyber tool called “Marble,” which was used during 2016 for “obfuscation” (CIA’s word). This tool can be used to conduct a forensic attribution double game (aka a false-flag operation); it included test samples in Arabic, Chinese, Farsi, Korean, and Russian. Washington Post reporter Ellen Nakashima, to her credit, immediately penned an informative article on the Marble cyber-tool, under the catching (and accurate) headline “WikiLeaks’ latest release of CIA cyber-tools could blow the cover on agency hacking operations.” That was apparently before Nakashima “got the memo.” Mainstream media have otherwise avoided like the plague any mention of Marble.

Mr. President, we do not know if CIA’s Marble, or tools like it, played some kind of role in the campaign to blame Russia for hacking the DNC. Nor do we know how candid the denizens of CIA’s Directorate of Digital Innovation have been with the White House — or with former Director Pompeo — on this touchy issue. Since it is still quite relevant, we will repeat below a paragraph included in our July 2017 Memorandum to you under the sub-heading “Putin and the Technology:”

“We also do not know if you have discussed cyber issues in any detail with President Putin. In his interview with NBC’s Megyn Kelly, he seemed quite willing – perhaps even eager – to address issues related to the kind of cyber tools revealed in the Vault 7 disclosures, if only to indicate he has been briefed on them. Putin pointed out that today’s technology enables hacking to be “masked and camouflaged to an extent that no one can understand the origin” [of the hack] … And, vice versa, it is possible to set up any entity or any individual that everyone will think that they are the exact source of that attack. Hackers may be anywhere,” he said. “There may be hackers, by the way, in the United States who very craftily and professionally passed the buck to Russia. Can’t you imagine such a scenario? … I can.”

As we told Attorney General Barr five weeks ago, we consider Mueller’s findings fundamentally flawed on the forensics side and ipso facto incomplete. We also criticized Mueller for failing to interview willing witnesses with direct knowledge, like WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange.

Political Enemies & Mainstream Media (Forgive the Redundancy)

You may be unaware that in March 2017 lawyers for Assange and the Justice Department (acting on behalf of the CIA) reportedly were very close to an agreement under which Assange would agree to discuss “technical evidence ruling out certain parties” in the leak of the DNC emails and agree to redact some classified CIA information, in exchange for limited immunity. According to the investigative reporter John Solomon of The Hill, Sen. Mark Warner, (D-VA) vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, learned of the incipient deal and told then-FBI Director Comey, who ordered an abrupt“stand down” and an end to the discussions with Assange.

Why did Comey and Warner put the kibosh on receiving “technical evidence ruling out certain parties” [read Russia]? We won’t insult you with the obvious answer. Assange is now in prison, to the delight of so many — including Mrs. Clinton who has said Assange must now “answer for what he has done.”

But is it too late to follow up somehow on Assange’s offer? Might he or his associates be still willing to provide “technical evidence” showing, at least, who was not the culprit?

You, Mr. President, could cause that to happen. You would have to buck strong resistance at every turn, and there all manner of ways that those with vested interests and a lot of practice in sabotage can try to thwart you — with the full cooperation of most media pundits. By now, you know all too well how that works.

But you are the president. And there may be no better time than now to face them down, show the spurious nature of the concocted “evidence” attempting to put you in “Putin’s pocket,” and — not least — lift the cloud that has prevented you from pursuing a more decent relationship with Russia.

For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)

Bogdan Dzakovic, former Team Leader of Federal Air Marshals and Red Team, FAA Security (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)

Mike Gravel, former Adjutant, top secret control officer, Communications Intelligence Service; special agent of the Counter Intelligence Corps and former United States Senator

James George Jatras, former U.S. diplomat and former foreign policy adviser to Senate leadership (Associate VIPS)

Larry Johnson, former CIA Intelligence Officer & former State Department Counter-Terrorism Official, (ret.)

Michael S. Kearns, Captain, USAF (ret.); ex-Master SERE Instructor for Strategic Reconnaissance Operations (NSA/DIA) and Special Mission Units (JSOC)

John Kiriakou, former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Karen Kwiatkowski, former Lt. Col., US Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003

Clement J. Laniewski, LTC, U.S. Army (ret.)

Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.)

Edward Loomis, NSA Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)

David MacMichael, former Senior Estimates Officer, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA presidential briefer (ret.)

Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for the Near East & CIA political analyst (ret.)

Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (ret.)

Peter Van Buren,U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Robert Wing, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (former) (associate VIPS)

Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. Diplomat who resigned in 2003 in opposition to the Iraq War

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Ukraine’s president-in-waiting Zelensky vows to end conflict in Donbass with ‘POWERFUL INFOWAR’

Zelensky vowed to “act within the Normandy format,” referring to the French-German-Russian-Ukrainian talks on war in Donbass, saying that “we will continue the Minsk process, we will restart it.”

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT…


Comedian-turned-politician Volodymyr Zelensky, set for a landslide win in Ukraine’s presidential vote, stayed true to character at his first press conference, dropping some flashy promises but refusing to go into boring detail.

Shortly after claiming electoral victory, Zelensky held a Q&A session with reporters at his campaign HQ in a Kiev business center. While the official results of the elections have yet to be announced, multiple exit polls suggest he secured more than 72 percent of votes.

Zelensky addressed the media in an easy-going manner. He spoke in a mix of Ukrainian and Russian, switching between the two languages, sometimes in one sentence. He also talked English a bit. But if the press hoped to shed light on the policies of the incoming president and his team, the conference actually generated more questions than answers.

Bringing the civil war in eastern Ukraine to an end appears to be one of the top priorities for Zelensky.

Promising to announce some kind of a plan shortly, he asked the reporters for help in the upcoming “infowar” that he says would help end the conflict, which, since 2014, has been raging between Kiev’s troops and the rebel self-proclaimed republics.

We will launch a very powerful information war to end the war in Donbass.

He then vowed to “act within the Normandy format,” referring to the French-German-Russian-Ukrainian talks on war in Donbass, saying that “we will continue the Minsk process, we will restart it.”

Next up, Zelensky did not rule out – even if half-jokingly – that the outvoted president Petro Poroshenko could gain a government post if the public “asks so.”

Do you want me to appoint him? Then I will ask society… If they tell me that they want to see Petro Poroshenko in one post or another – maybe, I don’t know.

Zelensky added, though, that he would like to try “new people” first. But the very team of the soon-to-be president still remains a mystery, as he’s refusing to provide any names, be it the new administration, the judiciary, or the country’s military.

“We have very serious acting generals who have authority in the army, you will definitely see them. I have no right to give the names of these people now, as there is an agreement with the generals,” Zelensky said cryptically, likewise not revealing his candidate for prosecutor general.

For now, Zelensky and his Servant of the People party – notably named after his own comedy show where he played a schoolteacher-turned-president – are promising to introduce the team “in the near future.”

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

The Triumph of Evil

What is going on is that American oil companies want to recover their control over the revenue streams from Venezuela’s vast oil reserves.

Paul Craig Roberts

Published

on

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts:


Today (April 17) I heard a NPR “news” report that described the democratically elected president of Venezuela as “the Venezuelan dictator Maduro.” By repeating over and over that a democratically elected president is a dictator, the presstitutes create that image of Maduro in the minds of vast numbers of peoples who know nothing about Venezuela and had never heard of Maduro until he is dropped on them as “dictator.”

Nicolas Maduro Moros was elected president of Venezuela in 2013 and again in 2018. Previously he served as vice president and foreign minister, and he was elected to the National Assembly in 2000. Despite Washington’s propaganda campaign against him and Washington’s attempt to instigate violent street protests and Maduro’s overthrow by the Venezuelan military, whose leaders have been offered large sums of money, Maduro has the overwhelming support of the people, and the military has not moved against him.

What is going on is that American oil companies want to recover their control over the revenue streams from Venezuela’s vast oil reserves. Under the Bolivarian Revolution of Chavez, continued by Maduro, the oil revenues instead of departing the country have been used to reduce poverty and raise literacy inside Venezuela.

The opposition to Maduro inside Venezuela comes from the elites who have been traditionally allied with Washington in the looting of the country. These corrupt elites, with the CIA’s help, temporarily overthrew Chavez, but the people and the Venezuelan military secured his release and return to the presidency.

Washington has a long record of refusing to accept any reformist governments in Latin America. Reformers get in the way of North America’s exploitation of Latin American countries and are overthrown.

With the exceptions of Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba, and Nicaragua, Latin America consists of Washington’s vassal states. In recent years Washington destroyed reform governments in Honduras, Argentina and Brazil and put gangsters in charge.

According to US national security adviser John Bolton, a neoconservative war monger, the governments in Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua will soon be overthrown. New sanctions have now been placed on the three countries. Washington in the typical display of its pettiness targeted sanctions against the son of the Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega. https://www.rt.com/news/456841-bolton-russia-venezuela-threat/

Ortega has been the leader of Nicaragua since for 40 years. He was president 1985-1990 and has been elected and reelected as president since 2006.

Ortega was the opponent of Somoza, Washington’s dictator in Nicaragua. Consequently he and his movement were attacked by the neoconservative operation known as Iran-Contra during the Reagan years. Ortega was a reformer. His government focused on literacy, land reform, and nationalization, which was at the expense of the wealthy ruling class. He was labeled a “Marxist-Leninist,” and Washington attempted to discredit his reforms as controversial leftist policies.

Somehow Castro and Ortega survived Washington’s plots against them. By the skin of his teeth so did Chavez unless you believe it was the CIA that gave him cancer. Castro and Chavez are dead. Ortega is 74. Maduro is in trouble, because Washington has stolen Venezuela’s bank deposits and cut Venezuela off the international financial system, and the British have stolen Venezuela’s gold. This makes it hard for Venezuela to pay its debts.

The Trump regime has branded the democratically twice-elected Maduro an “illegitimate” president. Washington has found a willing puppet, Juan Guaido, to take Maduro’s place and has announced that the puppet is now the president of Venezuela. No one among the Western presstitutes or among the vassals of Washington’s empire finds it strange that an elected president is illegitimate but one picked by Washington is not.

Russia and China have given Maduro diplomatic support. Both have substantial investments in Venezuela that would be lost if Washington seizes the country. Russia’s support for Maduro was declared by Bolton today to be a provocation that is a threat to international peace and security. Bolton said his sanctions should be seen by Russia as a warning against providing any help for the Venezuelan government.

Secretary of state Mike Pompeo and vice president Pence have added their big mouths to the propaganda against the few independent governments in Latin America. Where is the shame when the highest American government officials stand up in front of the world and openly proclaim that it is official US government policy to overthrow democratically elected governments simply because those governments don’t let Americans plunder their countries?

How is it possible that Pompeo can announce that the “days are numbered” of the elected president of Nicaragua, who has been elected president 3 or 4 times, and the world not see the US as a rogue state that must be isolated and shunned? How can Pompeo describe Washington’s overthrow of an elected government as “setting the Nicaraguan people free?”

The top officials of the US government have announced that they intend to overthrow the governments of 3 countries and this is not seen as “a threat to international peace and security?”

How much peace and security did Washington’s overthrow of governments in Iraq, Libya, Ukraine, and the attempted overthrow of Syria bring?

Washington is once again openly violating international law and the rest of the world has nothing to say?

There is only one way to describe this: The Triumph of Evil.

“The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere the ceremony of innocence is drowned; the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.” — William Butler Yeats

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Videos

Trending