The Deep Corruptness of Today’s Democratic Party

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Eric Zuesse

Resize text-+=

The Deep Corruptness of Today’s Democratic Party
Eric ZuesseNovember 11, 2024

The Democratic Party: an incurably corrupt political tool serving the billionaire class and no one else.

Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)

Because I am and always have been a progressive, I’ve always been strongly opposed to the post-Abraham-Lincoln Republican Party, which has always represented ONLY America’s wealthiest, against everybody else; but, as an investigative historian I have also come to recognize that ever since 25 July 1945, the Democratic Party — just like the Republican Party — is LIKEWISE representing ONLY the billionaires, who are united in placing as their #1 priority the creation and universal expansion of the U.S. empire, which started on that date and has been expanding ever since, though nowadays there is no other empire on this planet, and though the hundreds of trillions of U.S. dollars that have been spent on this imperial expansion (by means of subversions, sanctions, coups, and outright military invasions) have benefitted ONLY that richest 1% of the richest 1% of Americans, and have murdered tens of millions of people around the world and created hundreds of millions of people to become refugees (not to mention that these expenditures have come at the expense of trillions of dollars that could otherwise have gone toward increasing the health, education, social security, and general welfare, of the American public). This massive harm, by and for America’s billionaires, is the result of what is commonly called “neoconservatism,” which is the belief that the U.S. Government (which is controlled by America’s billionaires) must control all other countries.

So, the things that I will say here against the Democratic Party are equally the case against ALSO the Republican Party: BOTH Parties are billionaire-controlled and for billionaire-benefit. Both of America’s Parties are for the billionaires (and their millions of neoconservative agents) against the public. They control the public by deceiving the public through the ‘news’-media that they control by means not only of their ownership of them but also by their OTHER corporations (profit and ‘non’-profit) advertising in them. That’s the way the billionaires — America’s actual Deep State — achieve and maintain their control.

See video above]

That video OUGHT to have been headlined the way that this article is, but, perhaps because it was so explosive in its content, The Hill wanted it to attract as little attention as possible and so headlined it instead with the very routine “Krystal Ball exposes anti-Bernie media bias” (which was only the video’s opening, but that was just the opening 2 minutes of this 8-minute video, which was devoted 100% to explaining the deep corruptness of today’s Democratic Party and of its ‘news’-media. Ball’s co-host Saagar Enjeti further detailed the way in which an American ‘journalist’ is effectively coerced to either avoid reporting truths that the employers want the public not to know, or else to accept to be made available to only ‘alternative news’ audiences — who already know that the major ‘news’-media are untrustworthy because they are publicizing ONLY what their corporate masters want the public to ‘know’.

On 6 November 2024 (the day after the election), Krystal Ball posted at the progressive honest journalist Ryan Grim’s DropSiteNews, “Bernie Would Have Won”, and analyzed the election-results so as to conclude that whereas Trump’s conservative populism was viewed by the Republican Party’s megadonors as being acceptable, the Democratic Party’s megadonors viewed Bernie Sanders’s progressive populism as being deeply unacceptable and therefore they ditched his Presidential campaigns both in 2016 and in 2020. I have analyzed national polling on Sanders’s net-approval ratings throughout his time in the U.S. Senate and have many times mentioned in my articles that but for the hostility towards him by America’s billionaires, he would have easily won the Democratic Party’s primaries and the Presidency, and that the DNC just didn’t care about that clear fact. The same thing happened with RFK Jr. in 2023-2024: like Bernie, his net-approval ratings soared above any of the other Presidential candidates but the DNC ditched him, too, and so gave us, instead, first Joe Biden, and then Kamala Harris — both of whose net-approval ratings were well below zero — as were Trump’s. The billionaires WON’T ALLOW THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO GET AS A PRESIDENT A PERSON THAT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WANT TO BECOME THE PRESIDENT.

If a person is incorruptible, that person has no chance to rise to or even near the top in American politics at the federal Government level. That’s just a fact now. And this Government has the nerve to set itself as being the model that the entire world should look up to. It proclaims that the countries it wants to conquer are ‘autocracies’ instead of, like the U.S., a ‘democracy’ — and their ‘news’-media follow that lying imperialistic line, as-if it were instead fact. This is how they ‘justify’ their supposed right to control the countries they haven’t YET conquered. It’s all lies.

PS: If you like this article, please email it to all your friends or otherwise let others know about it. None of the U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media will likely publish it (nor link to it, since doing that might also hurt them with Google or etc.). I am not asking for money, but I am asking my readers to spread my articles far and wide, because I specialize in documenting what the Deep State is constantly hiding. This is, in fact, today’s samizdat.

Lili News 029

In cynicism and power, the US propaganda machine easily surpasses Orwells Ministry of Truth.
Now the fight against anti-semitism is being weaponised as a new sanctimonious McCarthyism.
Unless opposed, neither justice nor our Constitutional right to Free Speech will survive this assault.

URL has been copied successfully!

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License •
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

How the U.S. Government & Its Colonies Deceive Their Public

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Eric Zuesse

Resize text-+=

Putin is hated because he incarnates the resurgence of a sovereign Russia, and opposition to US hegemonism. Of course, that cannot be told the supine publics, hence the barrage of never ending lies.

5 November 2024, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)

Ever since 25 July 1945, the U.S. Government has had, as its #1 objective, to take control ultimately over all other countries (“hegemony”); and its main targets to conquer have been the world’s largest country, which is Russia, and then the world’s most populous country, which has been China. In order to do this, the U.S. regime needed to deceive their public to believe that ‘freedom and democracy’ were what they spread around the world by their coups and invasions, but most of their successful “regime-changes” actually replaced popularly elected democraticGovernments, such as Mossadegh in Iran, Arbenz in Guatemala, and Allende in Chile, by imposing there instead decades-long murderous military dictatorships such as The Shah in Iran, a long succession of brutal juntas in Guatemala, and the fascist (Milton Friedman acolyte and propagandist for ‘freedom’) Pinochet in Chile. The deceits by the U.S. regime and its colonies, have enabled the U.S. regime to impoverish, torture, and murder, millions of people throughout the world, extracting wealth from the conquered countries for America’s billionaires, all the while pretending to be “a force for good in the world.”

Go to top

“Is the West finally ready to admit defeat in Ukraine? The media is changing the narrative as the proxy war is running out of steam”

By Glenn Diesen, 3 November 2024

The Economist magazine reports this week that “Russia is slicing through Ukrainian defenses” and Ukraine is subsequently “struggling to survive.”Across the Western media, the public is being prepared for defeat and painful concessions in future negotiations. Journalists are changing the narrative as reality can no longer be ignored. Moscow’s coming success has been obvious since at least the summer of 2023, yet this was ignored, to keep the proxy war [between America and Russia] going.

We are witnessing an impressive demonstration of narrative control: For more than two years, the political-media elites [agents of U.S.-and-allied billionaires] have been chanting ‘Ukraine is winning’ and denounced any dissent to their narrative as [being] ‘Kremlin talking points’ that aim to reduce support for the war. What was ‘Russian propaganda’ yesterday is now suddenly the consensus of the collective elites. Critical self-reflection is as absent as it was after the Russiagate reporting, following the 2016 US election.

Similar narrative control was displayed when the media reassured the public for two decades that the US was in control of Afghanistan, before it fled in a great rush with dramatic images of people falling off an airplane [it happened not only in Afghanistan but also in the regime’s rushed evacuation from Vietnam, both planes and helicopters losing people].

Journalists deceived the public over the past while by presenting the stagnant front lines as evidence that Russia was not gaining an edge. However, in a war of attrition, the direction of the war is measured by attrition rates – the losses on each side. Territorial control comes after the adversary has been exhausted as territorial expansion is very costly in such high-intensity warfare with powerful defensive lines. The attrition rates have throughout the war been extremely unfavorable to Ukraine, and they keep getting worse [and U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media lied to say that Russia’s attrition-rates were higher than Ukraine’s]. The current collapse of Kiev’s front lines was very predictable as its manpower and weaponry have been exhausted.

Why has the former narrative expired? The public could be misled by fake attrition rates, yet it is not possible to cover up territorial changes after the eventual breaking point. Furthermore, the proxy war was beneficial to NATO [and to U.S.-and-allied armaments-manufacturers] when the Russians and Ukrainians were bleeding each other without any significant territorial changes. Now that the Ukrainians are exhausted and are beginning to lose strategic territory, it is no longer in the interests of the US-led bloc to continue the war.

Narrative control: Weaponizing empathy

Back in 2022, the political-media elites [billionaires-controlled ‘news’-media] weaponized empathy to get public support for war and disdain for diplomacy [for ending this extremely profitable violence]. The Western public was convinced to support the proxy war against Russia by endless messaging about the suffering of Ukrainians and the injustice of their loss of sovereignty [as-if Ukraine hadn’t already lost its sovereignty when Obama’s coup grabbed Ukraine in February 2014].

Those who disagreed with NATO’s mantra that ‘weapons are the way to peace’ and instead suggested negotiations, were quickly dismissed as puppets of the Kremlin who did not care about Ukrainians. Support for continued fighting in a war that cannot be won has been the only acceptable expression of empathy.

For the postmodernists seeking to socially construct their own reality, great power rivalry is largely a battle of narratives. The weaponization of empathy enabled the military narrative to become impervious to criticism. War was virtuous and diplomacy treasonous as Ukraine was allegedly fighting Russia’s “unprovoked” war with the objective to subjugate the entire country. A strong moral framing convinced people to deceive and self-censor in support of this noble cause.

British anti-imperialist Matt Kennard: We must resist US Hegemony at all costs.

Even criticism of how Ukrainian civilians were dragged into cars by their government and sent to their deaths on the front lines was portrayed as supporting ‘Kremlin talking points’, as it undermined the NATO war narrative.

Reporting on high Ukrainian casualty rates threatened to undermine support for the fighting. Reporting on the failure of sanctions threatened to reduce public support for the sanctions. Reporting on the likely US [blame for the] destruction of Nord Stream threatened to create divisions within NATO. Reporting on the US and UK sabotage of the Minsk agreements and the Istanbul negotiations threatened the narrative of the West merely attempting to ‘help’ Ukraine. The public was offered the binary option of adhering either to the pro-Ukraine/NATO narrative or the pro-Russia narrative. Anyone challenging it with inconvenient facts [that presented Russia as being right and America as being wrong in the war in Ukraine] could thus be accused of supporting Moscow’s objectives. Pointing out that Russia was winning was uncritically interpreted as taking its side [as-if, in a war, the side that wins is necessarily the better side in a moral sense, and not ONLY in a military sense].

There are ample facts and statements that demonstrate NATO has been fighting to the last Ukrainian to weaken a strategic rival. Yet, the strict narrative control entails that such evidence has not been permitted to be discussed.

The objectives of a proxy war: Bleeding the adversary

The strict demand for loyalty to the narrative hides the fact that US foreign policy is about restoring global primacy and not an altruistic commitment to liberal democratic values. The US considers Ukraine to be an important instrument to weaken Russia as a strategic rival.

The RAND Corporation, a think tank funded by the US government and renowned for its close ties with the intelligence community, published a report in 2019 on how the US could bleed Russia by pulling it further into Ukraine. RAND proposed that the US could send more military equipment to Kiev and threaten NATO expansion to provoke Moscow to increase its involvement in Ukraine:

“Providing more US military equipment and advice could lead Russia to increase its direct involvement in the conflict and the price it pays for it… While NATO’s requirement for unanimity makes it unlikely that Ukraine could gain membership in the foreseeable future, Washington pushing this possibility could boost Ukrainian resolve while leading Russia to redouble its efforts to forestall such a development.”

However, the same RAND report recognized that the strategy of bleeding Russia had to be carefully “calibrated,” as a full-scale war could result in Russia acquiring strategic territories, which is not in the interest of the US. After Russia launched its military operation in February 2022, the strategy was similarly to keep the war going as long as there were not significant territorial changes.

In March 2022, Leon Panetta (former White House chief of staff, secretary of defense, and CIA director) acknowledged: “We are engaged in a conflict here, it’s a proxy war with Russia, whether we say so or not… The way you get leverage is by, frankly, going in and killing Russians.” Even Zelensky recognized in March 2022 that some Western states wanted to use Ukraine as a proxy: “There are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives.”

US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin outlined the objectives in the Ukraine proxy war to as weakening its strategic adversary:

“We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine… So it [Russia] has already lost a lot of military capability. And a lot of its troops, quite frankly. And we want to see them not have the capability to very quickly reproduce that capability.”

There have also been indications of regime change as a wider goal of the war. Sources in the US and UK governments confirmed in March 2022 that the objective was for “the conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Putin,” as “the only end game now is the end of Putin regime.” US President Joe Biden suggested that regime change was necessary in Russia: “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.” However, the White House later walked back these dangerous remarks.

A spokesperson for then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson also made an explicit reference to regime change by arguing, “the measures we’re introducing, that large parts of the world are introducing, are to bring down the Putin regime.” James Heappey, the UK minister for the armed forces, similarly wrote in the Daily Telegraph:

Fighting to the last Ukrainian

Chas Freeman, the former US assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs and director for Chinese affairs at the State Department, has criticized Washington’s decision to ‘fight to the last Ukrainian’.

Meanwhile, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham outlined the favorable arrangements the US had established with Ukraine: “I like the structural path we’re on here. As long as we help Ukraine with the weapons they need and the economic support, they will fight to the last person.” The Republican Senate leader, Mitch McConnell, cautioned against conflating idealism the hard reality of US objectives in the proxy war:

“President Zelensky is an inspiring leader. But the most basic reasons for continuing to help Ukraine degrade and defeat the Russian invaders are cold, hard, practical American interests. Helping equip our friends in Eastern Europe to win this war is also a direct investment in reducing Vladimir Putin’s future capabilities to menace America, threaten our allies, and contest our core interests… Finally, we all know that Ukraine’s fight to retake its territory is neither the beginning nor end of the West’s broader strategic competition with Putin’s Russia.”

Senator Mitt Romney argued that arming Ukraine was “diminishing and devastating the Russian military for a very small amount of money… a weakened Russia is a good thing,” and it comes at a relatively low cost as “we’re losing no lives in Ukraine.” Senator Richard Blumenthal similarly asserted: “we’re getting our money’s worth on our Ukraine investment”because “for less than 3 percent of our nation’s military budget, we’ve enabled Ukraine to degrade Russia’s military strength by half… All without a single American service woman or man injured or lost.” Congressman Dan Crenshaw agrees that “investing in the destruction of our adversary’s military, without losing a single American troop, strikes me as a good idea.”

Retired US General Keith Kellogg similarly argued in March 2023 that “if you can defeat a strategic adversary not using any US troops, you are at the acme of professionalism.” Kellogg further explained that using Ukrainians to fight Russia “takes a strategic adversary off the table” and thus enables the US to focus on its “primary adversary which is China.”Former NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg also argued that defeating Russia and using Ukraine as a bulwark against Russia “will make it easier” for the US “to focus also on China… if Ukraine wins, then you will have the second biggest army in Europe, the Ukrainian army, battle-hardened, on our side, and we’ll have a weakened Russian army, and we have also now Europe really stepping up for defense spending.”

In search of a new narrative

A new victory narrative is required as a NATO-backed Ukraine cannot realistically defeat Russia on the battlefield. The most obvious is to claim that Russia has failed in its objective to annex all of Ukraine to help recreate the Soviet Union and thereafter conquer Europe. This spoofery would enable NATO to claim victory. After Ukraine’s disastrous counteroffensive in summer 2023, it was flagged by David Ignatius in the Washington Post, where he argued that the measurement of success is the weakening of Russia:

“Meanwhile, for the United States and its NATO allies, these 18 months of war have been a strategic windfall, at relatively low cost (other than for the Ukrainians). The West’s most reckless antagonist has been rocked. NATO has grown much stronger with the additions of Sweden and Finland. Germany has weaned itself from dependence on Russian energy and, in many ways, rediscovered its sense of values. NATO squabbles make headlines, but overall, this has been a triumphal summer for the alliance.”

Sean Bell, a former Royal Air Force air vice marshal and Ministry of Defense staffer, argued in September 2023 that the war had significantly degraded the Russian military to the point it “no longer poses a credible threat to Europe.” Bell therefore concluded that “the Western objective of this conflict has been achieved” and “The harsh reality is that Ukraine’s objectives are no longer aligned with their backers.”

The Ukrainian proxy has been exhausted, which ends the proxy war unless NATO is prepared to go to war against Russia. As NATO is preparing to cut its losses, a new narrative is required. Soon it will be permitted to call for negotiations as a display of empathy for Ukrainians [thus completing its deceit of their own supporters].

Obama with two major hegemonic war harpies: Susan Rice (center) and Samantha Power.

URL has been copied successfully!

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License •
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

How to tell if you’re getting news, or instead lying propaganda.

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Eric Zuesse

Resize text-+=

Mainstream media lies are the first line of defense of an unjust and undemocratic order.

Protest against NYTimes insidious lies. Even staffers have staged protests in recent months.

Lying propaganda is in favor of the Government but not necessarily of the political Party that happens to be running it at the time. The standard way of running a multi-Party dictatorship is by all of the major Parties being controlled (funded) by the nation’s super-rich or “Deep State” — something that in former eras was called “the aristocracy.” They determine whom each one of the Parties’ nominees will be, to run against each other, so that, in any case, the contest will be between various factions of the aristocracy, no authentic democracy at all. A typical example of this is today’s United States, which will be discussed here.

The ‘news’-media in such a dictatorship are likewise funded and controlled (such as by billionaires’ corporations advertising in them) by the billionaires — the same category of people who determine whom the Parties’ nominees will be.

Thus, lying propaganda is in favor of the Government, but not necessarily of the political Party that happens to be running it at the time. This way it can pretend to be ‘objective’ or even ‘non-partisan’ even while being a propaganda-vehicle (regardless of whether owned by the Government or by the media-corporations).

“Finally, the U.S. Government Is Demanding Israel’s to Halt Its Effort to Starve All Surviving Gazans to Death”; and, of course, no U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-medium would run such a headline.)

What this model of dictatorship shows us (and which holds true throughout all of at least the countries that are in the U.S. empire — the U.S. and its ‘allies’ or colonies), but perhaps also pertains in some of the independent nations, is that an aristocracy rules by treating its subjects (‘citizens’) as being fools who are willing to be deceived time and again forever and yet still retain their trust in — their faith in — their Government, believing that it is a democracy, no dictatorship.

The way to tell whether you are getting news, or instead lying propaganda (such as in the build-up to America’s 20 March 2003 invasion of Iraq, and to Russia’s 24 February 2002 invasion of Ukraine) is whether or not the given news-medium has been feeding you falsehoods in the past (such as all mainstream ‘news’-media throughout the U.S. empire do routinely). It is really just that simple. The test of whether it is news or instead propaganda is not “like rocket science,” at all. It is instead obvious, when you look at the record. Tragically few people do.

Only idiots, at this stage, still trust any mainstream American news-media.

by Eric Zuesse
October 14, 202425

Leading up to America’s shameful illegal destructive and evil invasion of Iraq on 20 March 2003, all of the U.S. mainstream news-media were uncritically trumpeting the White House’s lies against Iraq and Saddam Hussain, none of these propaganda-organizations were reporting the clearly-established but unpublicized crucial truths. After the falsehood of the White House’s allegations had become no longer credible even to most of the highly deceived American public, the U.S. Government’s excuse became that it had all been due to ‘intelligence failures’ (and U.S.-and-allied ‘historians’ continue to this day to trumpet that lie), but this too was nothing more than a blatant lie. All of this is thoroughly documented HERE. (That’s my article on the Iraq-matter, which links to all of its evidences.) Ever since then, I have known for certain that I live under a dictatorship — even the claim that America is a democracy is no longer true (if it ever was) — and that this Government routinely violates the U.S. Constitution, with total impunity.

Many times since then, I have observed the same thing regarding many other matters. All of these lies have been climaxed by the barbaric U.S.-and-allied Governments’ hoaxes that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on 24 Febrjuary 2022 was “aggression” and “unprovoked,” instead of having been an invasion that was forced upon Russia by the U.S. and its allies — forced upon Russia, which was doing only what it HAD to do in order to protect its own national security against the (up till then) ever-expanding, indeed cancerous, American empire. All of this is thoroughly documented HERE.

The latest major installment in this anti-Russian hoax is truthfully recounted and described in the following video, a 20-minute discussion that includes Alexander Mercouris, one of the greatest investigative journalists, and whose many videos I have been following for years I have never yet found to have alleged anything to be false — this being an absolutely extraordinary record:

“Woodward ‘WAR,’ Biden stared down Putin nuke threat”

14 October 2024 (also available at youtube but with interrupting ads)

I might also add here that if you might think that Mercouris is reading from a teleprompter because NO ONE can have THIS MUCH of a total-recall memory and have both maps and time-lines, and not only events, at ready-recall and logically interconnected in his head, so as to be able to tell on the very day of a historic event, what has been happening and why, this is the way he is: he doesn’t need to look at notes or at a prepared script in order to be able to do what he does. He is a great historian, and not ONLY a great investigative journalist. He is authentically a phenomenon — which none of the U.S.-and-allied media would ever want to hire (because he is too honest, too competent, and too insightful, for any of them to want to hire).

Also on October 14th, one of the major newspapers in America’s colony of the UK, the Independent, headlined as boringly as they could for a number of supposedly minor news-stories about the Ukraine war, “Ukraine-Russia latest: Kremlin accuses NATO of stoking nuclear tensions as drill with 2,000 troops launched”, including the actually ominous major news report, that Friedrich Merz, who is widely expected to be Germany’s next leader (and Germany is America’s largest colony, with 231 U.S. military bases), had criticized Germany’s current leader Olaf Scholz, for NOTtransgressing Russia’s stated red line that if any NATO nation allows Ukraine to use that nation’s donated missiles so as to strike deep enough into Russia to threaten to decapitate Russia’s central command in The Kremlin, then Russia won’t wait but will promptly destroy not only Ukraine but that nation and any (such as America) who have allowed it to allow that permission to Ukraine. Merz said he would “supply [to Ukraine] the Taurus missiles. Then it is up to (Russian President Vladimir) Putin to decide how far he wants to escalate this war”, “according to N-TV” (which is viewed by only 1% of the German public). In other words: just as in America the expected winner of the White House, Kamala Harris, is not known by the American people to want to force Russia to start WW3, so too is this the case in the U.S. regime’s biggest colony.

This time it is not just Iraq etcetera that the U.S. regime wants to conquer, but Russia itself. And Russia has already made clear that they won’t allow this to happen. Russia is not “playing chicken” with America, and it is not playing cat-and-mouse with it either. Unlike the U.S. regime, it has no interest in taking over the entire world, but it DOES have not only an interest but a determination, to remain a sovereign and independent country over its own territory, even if it will have to conquer a colony that the U.S. seized (in 2014), so as to protect itself from the U.S. regime. That’s a fact which almost nobody in the U.S. empire talks about.

PS: If you like this article, please email it to all your friends or otherwise let others know about it. None of the U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media will likely publish it (nor link to it, since doing that might also hurt them with Google or etc.). I am not asking for money, but I am asking my readers to spread my articles far and wide, because I specialize in documenting what the Deep State is constantly hiding. This is, in fact, today’s samizdat.

URL has been copied successfully!

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License •
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

How the U.S. Government Deceives the World

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Eric Zuesse

Resize text-+=

NOTE: Videos that don't show have been obviously banned or sabotaged by the usual suspects.

How the U.S. Government Deceives the World

Nuland and Blinken in Kiev in 2021. For Nuland, this has meant the nursing of a regime change op and its aftermath for almost 14 years.

Eric Zuesse

I’ll let the documentation tell the story here, which story is about what started the war in Ukraine, taking that as the case for discussion here because the likeliest conflict to produce a world-destroying World War Three (WW3) would be further expansion of the war between Russia and America’s NATO that has been going on in the battlefields of Ukraine; and, so, what follows is documenting exactly how this war actually started:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/nov/26/ukraine.usa

https://archive.is/Kq2W3 [19 August 2013]

“US campaign behind the turmoil in Kiev”

25 November 2004, Ian Traynor the Guardian's European editor. He is based in Brussels [LATEST: “Nato members could act against Syria without UN mandate: 25 Aug 2013: Kosovo-style humanitarian intervention could justify Nato military action against Assad regime after alleged chemical attacks”]

With their websites and stickers, their pranks and slogans aimed at banishing widespread fear of a corrupt regime, the democracy guerrillas of the Ukrainian Pora youth movement have already notched up a famous victory - whatever the outcome of the dangerous stand-off in Kiev.

Ukraine, traditionally passive in its politics, has been mobilised by the young democracy activists and will never be the same again.

But while the gains of the orange-bedecked "chestnut revolution" are Ukraine's, the campaign is an American creation, a sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in western branding and mass marketing that, in four countries in four years, has been used to try to salvage rigged elections and topple unsavoury regimes.

Funded and organised by the US government, deploying US consultancies, pollsters, diplomats, the two big American parties and US non-government organisations, the campaign was first used in Europe in Belgrade in 2000 to beat Slobodan Milosevic at the ballot box.

Richard Miles, the US ambassador in Belgrade, played a key role. And by last year, as US ambassador in Tbilisi, he repeated the trick in Georgia, coaching Mikhail Saakashvili in how to bring down Eduard Shevardnadze.

Ten months after the success in Belgrade, the US ambassador in Minsk, Michael Kozak, a veteran of similar operations in central America, notably in Nicaragua, organised a near identical campaign to try to defeat the Belarus hardman, Alexander Lukashenko.

That one failed. "There will be no Kostunica in Belarus," the Belarus president declared, referring to the victory in Belgrade.

But experience gained in Serbia, Georgia and Belarus has been invaluable in plotting to beat the regime of Leonid Kuchma in Kiev.

The operation - engineering democracy through the ballot box and civil disobedience - is now so slick that the methods have matured into a template for winning other people's elections. …

If the events in Kiev vindicate the US in its strategies for helping other people win elections and take power from anti-democratic regimes, it is certain to try to repeat the exercise elsewhere in the post-Soviet world.

The places to watch are Moldova and the authoritarian countries of central Asia.

Video:

“Victoria Nuland at ‘Ukraine in Washington 2013’: Ukrainians deserve a government that respects them”

16,127 views Dec 14, 2013, 37 Comments [as-of 9 October 2024]

Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland spoke at "Ukraine in Washington 2013" conference organized by U.S.- Ukraine Foundation on December 13.

transcript:

http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2013/12/20131216289031.html#axzz3AYCD5nr4

https://archive.ph/9Srw5 [30 April 2016]

“Assistant Secretary Nuland at U.S.-Ukraine Foundation Conference”

16 December 2013

U.S. Department of State

Remarks by Victoria Nuland

Assistant Secretary, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs

Washington, DC

December 13, 2013

Remarks

the video:

the transcript: https://archive.ph/9Srw5#selection-461.0-469.162:

Since Ukraine’s independence in 1991, the United States has supported Ukrainians as they build democratic skills and institutions, as they promote civic participation and good governance, all of which are preconditions for Ukraine to achieve its European aspirations. We’ve invested over $5 billion to assist Ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.

Today there are senior officials in the Ukrainian government, in the business community, as well as in the opposition, civil society and religious community who believe in this democratic and European future for their country and they’ve been working hard to move their country and their president in the right direction.

We urge the government, we urge the president to listen to these voices, to listen to the Ukrainian people, to listen to the Euro-Maidan and take Ukraine forward.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2014/mar/19/facebook-posts/united-states-spent-5-billion-ukraine-anti-governm/

https://archive.is/5HOzl [30 April 2016]

“Facebook posts stated on March 19, 2014 in a Facebook meme:”

President Barack Obama spent "$5 billion paying Ukrainians to riot and dismantle their democratically elected government."

A meme on Facebook says President Barack Obama spent “$5 billion paying Ukrainians to riot and dismantle their democratically elected government.”

By Katie Sanders

March 19, 2014

The United States spent $5 billion on Ukraine anti-government riots

It’s a conspiracy with mainstream crossover: The United States bankrolled the bloody political uprising in Ukraine.

We saw the claim pop up recently in a story on RT (the Russian-funded English language cable network), and found lots of talk about it on reddit, Facebook and other websites.

The claims have the same basic structure. While President Barack Obama publicly said Ukrainians have the right to determine their own future, the U.S. government pumped $5 billion into the country to promote regime change.

In a Facebook meme, someone put it this way:

Obama "spends $5 billion paying Ukrainians to riot and dismantle their democratically elected government."

So is there any truth to this claim? PunditFact dove in.

The roots

The claim is rooted in a December 2013 speech by Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland to the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation, a non-governmental agency that promotes democracy in the former Soviet republic.

Nuland had returned days earlier from her third trip to Ukraine in five weeks to assess the protests over President Viktor Yanukovych’s policies to move away from the European Union, she said.

She made clear the United States supported the protesters’ fight and spoke of how she met with Yanukovych, pressing him to end the pushback from Ukrainian security forces because it is "absolutely impermissible in a European state, in a democratic state."

She described how American taxpayer money has supported Ukraine’s democratic development despite the country’s challenges.

"Since Ukraine's independence in 1991, the United States has supported Ukrainians as they build democratic skills and institutions, as they promote civic participation and good governance, all of which are preconditions for Ukraine to achieve its European aspirations," she said. "We have invested over $5 billion to assist Ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine."

Her eight-minute speech (video) attracted little to no media attention.

The truth

We had a feeling that folks repeating the claim missed important context from Nuland’s speech. Wasn’t Nuland talking about money given since Ukraine broke away from the Soviet Union?

The State Department said yes.

"The insinuation that the United States incited the people of Ukraine to riot or rebel is patently false," said Nicole Thompson, a State Department spokeswoman.

Since 1992, the government has spent about $5.1 billion to support democracy-building programs in Ukraine, Thompson said, with money flowing mostly from the Department of State via U.S. Agency for International Development, as well as the departments of Defense, Energy, Agriculture and others. The United States does this with hundreds of other countries.

About $2.4 billion went to programs promoting peace and security, which could include military assistance, border security, human trafficking issues, international narcotics abatement and law enforcement interdiction, Thompson said. More money went to categories with the objectives of "governing justly and democratically" ($800 million), "investing in people" ($400 million), economic growth ($1.1 billion), and humanitarian assistance ($300 million).

The descriptions are a bit vague, which could lead people to think the money was used for some clandestine purpose.

But even if it that were so, the money in question was spent over more than 20 years. Yanukovych was elected in 2010. So any connection between the protests and the $5 billion is inaccurate.

And Obama was elected in 2008, so any connection between $5 billion and Obama also is inaccurate.

The challenge

We attempted to drill down and verify the expenditures independently but found that a difficult task.

That’s a byproduct of the United States’ foreign aid investments, which rival no other country (though supporters note the spending equals only 1 percent of all federal spending). The massive check-writing across dozens of agencies to non-governmental organizations to scores of countries and regions around the world is almost impossible to untangle.

"As it stands, it is nearly impossible to find a figure," said Nicole Valentinuzzi, communications manager of Publish What You Fund, a group that pushes for aid transparency across the world. "These kinds of things would be easily verifiable if people were given timely information."

The State Department created ForeignAssistance.gov to help taxpayers, journalists and others find out where the money is going, but the data is limited in the number of years available and not reported by all agencies.

"The Foreign Assistance dashboard is not capturing this information in an up-to-date, current way," Valentinuzzi said, "so responding to a humanitarian crisis is a bit untraceable while it happens, which we argue makes it less effective, basically."

That said, the United States is working on being more transparent.

The site started under the Obama administration and is a "work in progress," Thompson said. Eight agencies, such as U.S. AID, Millennium Challenge Corporation and the Treasury Department, have begun posting planning and spending data to the site. Still, 14 agencies, including the departments of Agriculture, Energy, Transportation, and Health and Human Services, have not.

From that website, we calculated the United States spent $456.4 million in Ukraine since 2009. Again, that’s an incomplete picture based on incomplete data reporting.

Some examples? The United States spent about $20 million on Peace Corps programs in Ukraine over the past four years. It spent about $40 million through U.S. AID on health programs in the countries since 2010 -- fighting HIV/AIDs, malaria and providing for maternal and child health. The United States spent an additional $80 million or so working on projects related to weapons of mass destruction, according to ForeignAssistance.gov.

Our ruling

Contrary to claims, the United States did not spend $5 billion to incite the rebellion in Ukraine.

That’s a distorted understanding of remarks given by a State Department official. She was referring to money spent on democracy-building programs (sic) in Ukraine since it broke off from the Soviet Union in 1991.

We rate the claim Pants on Fire.

!function(r,u,m,b,l,e){r._Rumble=b,r[b]||(r[b]=function(){(r[b]._=r[b]._||[]).push(arguments);if(r[b]._.length==1){l=u.createElement(m),e=u.getElementsByTagName(m)[0],l.async=1,l.src="https://rumble.com/embedJS/uukz21"+(arguments[1].video?'.'+arguments[1].video:'')+"/?url="+encodeURIComponent(location.href)+"&args="+encodeURIComponent(JSON.stringify([].slice.apply(arguments))),e.parentNode.insertBefore(l,e)}})}(window, document, "script", "Rumble");

Rumble("play", {"video":"vtitu8","div":"rumble_vtitu8"});

“Ukraine Crisis - What You're Not Being Told”
(This video has a ridiculous "age restriction" label on YouTube, preventing indepedent blogs from running the video on their platforms, and thereby, under a disgusting pretext, dampening ciculation. Fortunately, Rumble had a copy of it and it runs well on our site.—Ed.)

12 March 2014

[That’s the best video documentary I’ve ever seen, and it’s central to my artiicle, so no one who hasn’t seen and listened to this ten-minute and 36 second documentary will have read my article.]

“Larry Diamond, Global Democratic Trends (with commentary from Marc Plattner)”

21 August 2014

Larry Diamond is shown having produced the most popular-in-Ukraine overthrow-Yanukovych ad at

In my article “How the U.S. Government Creates Violence on a Grand Scale”, I provide the broader context behind America’s coup in Ukraine against Russia.

At least in 2014, Putin was, or pretended to be, ignorant that this was a coup created by Obama, though he did know that it had been someone’s coup. However, he still didn’t know or understand that it was done in the way that Diamond, Nuland, and others in that operation label to be “democratic” regardless of whether it was done by means of deceiving, lying to, the public. Putin’s scientific-theoretic understanding of what the U.S. Government has been doing is incomplete, at best. One interview of him is especially informative about this:

The 14 November 2014 ARD German Government TV network broadcast interview of Putin

“This video is private.” However, up until at least 14 September 2015, it had been public, and was being archived by some of its viewers online; so, here it fortunately is, from an archived copy:

“English: Exclusive ARD interview with Russian President Putin | Günther Jauch | ARD”

Published on Nov 17, 2014,

from which interview, I here provide these two extended excerpts:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150914075634/

10:55: JAUCH: For the West, this [Russia’s annexation of Crimea] was a clear breach of international law. PUTIN: What’s the question? JAUCH: The question is, did you underestimate the reaction of the West? … We find this reaction absolutely disproportionate. … PUTIN: When we’re confronted with the accusations that Russia has violated international law, I can hardly feel anything but astonishment. What is international law? First and foremost, it’s the charter of the United Nations. … A vivid and fresh precedent was set in Kosovo. JAUCH: You mean the judgment of the International Criminal Court, with respect to Kosovo, which said that Kosovo had the right to self-determination, and that the people of Kosovo could vote on whether they wanted to have their own state or not? PUTIN: Exactly so, but there’s more to it than that. The most important thing mentioned there was that in terms of self-determination, people populating a certain area are not obliged to ask the opinion of the central authorities of the state where they are resident. There’s no need to have permission from the central governmental authorities, in order to take the necessary steps to self-determination. This is the most crucial point, and nothing that transpired in Crimea was any different from that which happened in Kosovo. I am deeply convinced that Russia has not violated any international laws. I am very open about this. It’s a fact, and we’ve never concealed it. … Besides, what is democracy? You and I know very well, what does demos mean, it means people. Democracy means the rule by the people. In our case, it’s the people’s right to be independent.

— earlier in it:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150914075634/

One might hope that Putin understands better now. However, even till this very day, he hasn’t yet blamed Obama as having been the top person in the coup, the person who ordered it to be organized and done. And, of course, Obama’s V.P., Joe Biden, as well as Jake Sullivan (both mentioned by Nuland at 4:05 in the video of the complete phone-conversation between Nuland and her Ambassador in Ukraine — of which conversation only portions were shown in that masterful 10:36 video documentary about the entire coup) were also part of the coup-operation.

In closing here, I should mention that the great investigative journalist Seymour Hersh’s 8 February 2023 article “How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline”, about how the Russian-German Nord Stream pipelines carrying natural gas from Russia to the EU (the EU’s by-far cheapest-of-all energy-sources) were blown up on 26 September 2022 under the order of Joe Biden, received powerful confirmation, paywall-published this September 26th by a Danish newspaper, from a witness who says that until the two-year mark he was “not allowed to say a thing” about it — and who supports (as the newspaper puts it) “the theory that American star journalist Seymour Hersh, among others, has put forward without any documentation: that the US was behind the sabotage.” Hersh has many times said that his article includes not the entire story but only the parts of it that he is certain of and which won’t enable his sources to be identified (and maybe killed). Of course, Biden denies it entirely.

Yesterday I headlined “NATO has begun its death-spiral.” The big question now is whether the U.S. Government, which controls NATO, will allow NATO to go all the way to WW3 in order to prevent a Russian victory in the Ukraine war.

PS: If you like this article, please email it to all your friends or otherwise let others know about it. None of the U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media will likely publish it (nor link to it, since doing that might also hurt them with Google or etc.).

URL has been copied successfully!

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License •
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Former UK Diplomat Alastair Crooke Explains Why Hezbollah Still Will Likely Win

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Eric Zuesse

Resize text-+=

DATELINE: 1 October 2024

“Alastair Crooke: Netanyahu Gambles on Slaughter”

30 September 2024, Judge Napolitano interviews Crooke

That’s the best commentary I’ve seen on Israel’s war against Hezbollah and Iran, but here are two other commentators whom I have likewise found previously to have an exceptionally high percentage of their predictions come true, and they likewise agree with Crooke — Brian Berletic, and the anonymous “Moon of Alabama” blogger:

https://journal-neo.su/2024/09/24/washington-sets-trap-for-iran-will-iran-take-the-bait/

https://archive.is/RNjP1

“Washington Sets Trap for Iran, Will Iran Take the bait?”

24 September 2024, Brian Berletic

Amid the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and growing tensions in the Asia-Pacific, Washington is moving toward an equally dangerous, regional war in the Middle East between its Israeli proxies and a growing list of neighboring states and organizations.

This includes Lebanon and the Lebanese-based military and political organization Hezbollah, the Syrian Arab Republic, Iran, as well as Shi’a militias across Iraq and Yemeni-based Ansar Allah referred to across the Western media as the “Houthis.”

This large group of nations and organizations stretching across the region share a common denominator – they all serve as obstacles to US primacy over the region, with the US itself having waged war directly and/or indirectly against each since the end of World War2.

Just as the US has recruited Ukraine to wage war on Russia by proxy in Eastern Europe and has politically captured and used the island province of Taiwan against the rest of China in the Asia-Pacific region, the US has carefully cultivated Israel politically and militarily for decades to serve as a proxy used to carry out assassinations, terrorist attacks, military strikes, and even provoke wars the US itself seeks plausible deniability in regard to.

Washington seeks war – by proxy or otherwise – with Iran sooner rather than later

Toward this end, the US provides Israel with billions in aid annually, including a steady flow of arms and ammunition Israel’s various wars of aggression would be impossible to conduct without. While Washington publicly poses as seeking peace and stability in the Middle East, its continuous support for Israel enables the perpetual conflict and instability undermining the region.

Most recently, the US has repeatedly claimed to have urged Israeli restraint regarding its military operations against Gaza. In practice, however, the US has enabled the large-scale destruction of Gaza through the continual shipment of munitions including thousands of bombs used in Israeli airstrikes. …

The nature of Israeli belligerence is transparent, part of a well-documented US policy to provoke wider war across the Middle East the US can then justify intervening in – and war both the US and its Israeli proxies can cite when using weapons and tactics otherwise difficult or impossible to justify – up to and including nuclear weapons.

In 2009, the Brookings Institution in its 170-page paper titled, “Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran” [by the six neocons Kenneth M. Pollack, Daniel L. Byman, Martin Indyk, Suzanne Maloney, Michael E. O’Hanlon, and Bruce Riedel], would detail various means to coerce, contain, and ultimately overthrow the government of Iran, including waging war against Iran.

The paper admits how difficult it would be for the United States itself to launch military strikes against Iran, stating:

… any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context—both to ensure the logistical support the operation would require and to minimize the blowback from it.

It also says:

… it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be. Of course, it would be very difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this game, which would then undermine it.

An entire chapter was dedicated to the use of Israel to carry out an initial strike on Iran, allowing the US to distance itself from culpability. Titled, “Leave it to Bibi: Allowing or Encouraging an Israeli Military Strike,” it explicitly states:

… the goal of this policy option would be to destroy key Iranian nuclear facilities in the hope that doing so would significantly delay Iran’s acquisition of an indigenous nuclear weapons capability. However, in this case, an added element could be that the United States would encourage — and perhaps even assist — the Israelis in conducting the strikes themselves, in the expectation that both international criticism and Iranian retaliation would be deflected away from the United States and onto Israel.

The paper notes that an Israeli strike could, “trigger a wider conflict between Israel and Iran that could draw in the United States and other countries,” giving Washington the pretext it seeks ahead of any war of aggression it itself wages against Iran.

With this policy in mind, Israel’s steady cadence of increasingly provocative attacks against Iran and its allies is easier to understand. The US, through Israeli provocations, seeks to provoke a wider war the US itself can wade into, appearing to be aiding an ally rather than initiating yet another war of aggression in the Middle East.

Ultimately, for this trap to work successfully, Iran must retaliate to one of these many provocations, and do so in a way the US and its allies can portray as disproportionate or even “unprovoked.”

So far, Iran’s responses have been exceedingly measured. …

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2024/10/israel-invading-lebanon-to-prolong-and-expand-its-supremacists-war.html

https://archive.is/tb9Ug

October 01, 2024

“Israel - Invading Lebanon To Prolong And Expand Its Supremacists War”

Is it a trap?

That is the question the Zionists should ask themselves. To me the answer seems to be 'Yes!'

The Zionist entity is invading Lebanon - again. All earlier such invasions have ended in failure. Zionist troops had to retreat under fire. The current invasion is unlikely to see a better fate.

The Izzies, and their U.S. sponsors, are delirious over their perceived success in killing a number of Hizbullah officials including its leader, Sayed Hassan Nasrallah.

Don't they understand that Hizbullah has explicitly been built in ways that allow it to sustain such losses? All the murdered officials have already been replaced. If these new ones get killed their replacements are ready.

Before last week the war between the resistance was restricted to an (unequal) exchange of missiles. Israel fired many more than the resistance but not to more effect. The nature of that slow walking war of attrition will now change.

An Israeli ground invasion is exactly what Hizbullah has prepared for. It has readied its ambush sites. Its weapons and the people need to launch them are down in their well prepared bunkers.

The invading forces will be subjected to all kind of surprises. The ground troops are expected to proceed only after heavy preparatory bombing. But the mountainous grounds will allow the defenders to survive the bombing and to attack when and where they are least suspected. I do expect heavy military casualties but mostly on the attacker's side.

This war will likely go on for several months. It could easily extend into a years long and much larger conflict.

The Biden administrations is in full support of the invasion. It may even have urgedNetanyahoo to proceed with it:

Senior White House figures privately told Israel that the U.S. would support its decision to ramp up military pressure against Hezbollah — even as the Biden administration publicly urged the Israeli government in recent weeks to curtail its strikes, according to American and Israeli officials.

Presidential adviser Amos Hochstein and Brett McGurk, the White House coordinator for the Middle East, told top Israeli officials in recent weeks that the U.S. agreed with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s broad strategy to shift Israel’s military focus to the north against Hezbollah in order to convince the group to engage in diplomatic talks to end the conflict, the officials told POLITICO.

The Pentagon though is not convinced that this operation will be a success. It fears that, at some point, the U.S. forces will be sent in to rescue the Izzies from a severe defeat.

The Netanyahoo government will try its best to expand the war into Syria or, even further, into an all out war on Iran. It will need the full military support from the U.S. to do so. Its political maneuvering towards the U.S. will thus be done with the intent to further drag it into the war.

Without the full support of the U.S. Israel will fail to become the regional superpower it is striving to be.

With full U.S. support their might be a chance, a small one though, for Israel to win this round. …

URL has been copied successfully!

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License •
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

The Deep Corruptness of Today’s Democratic Party

Eric Zuesse

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

How the U.S. Government & Its Colonies Deceive Their Public

Eric Zuesse

“Is the West finally ready to admit defeat in Ukraine? The media is changing the narrative as the proxy war is running out of steam”

Narrative control: Weaponizing empathy

The objectives of a proxy war: Bleeding the adversary

In search of a new narrative

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

How to tell if you’re getting news, or instead lying propaganda.

Eric Zuesse

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

How the U.S. Government Deceives the World

Eric Zuesse

NOTE: Videos that don't show have been obviously banned or sabotaged by the usual suspects. How the U.S. Government Deceives the World

By Katie Sanders

The roots

The truth

The challenge

Our ruling

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

Former UK Diplomat Alastair Crooke Explains Why Hezbollah Still Will Likely Win

Eric Zuesse

“Israel - Invading Lebanon To Prolong And Expand Its Supremacists War”

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post.

NOTE: Videos that don't show have been obviously banned or sabotaged by the usual suspects.

How the U.S. Government Deceives the World