Tuesday, January 29, 2019

Red tags

"Insights on the Iran deal, BRICS and Venezuela" (Escobar interviews Celso Amorim, former Brazilian foreign minister under Lula):
"Switching to the Obama era, tell us about the role of Brazil, alongside Turkey, in the Iran nuclear negotiation, when you clinched a deal in Tehran in less than 24 hours, only for it to be smashed by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton the next day.
It was a long process, followed by 19 hours of negotiations, the Iranians tried to reopen one of the issues, both Lula and Erdogan refused. What facilitated our role as mediators was that the US had its hands full in the Middle East. I already had contacts with Javier Solana, then a sort of Foreign Affairs Minister of the EU, and also [Egyptian diplomat] ElBaradei, from my time at the UN. Obama, in a meeting of the G-8 + 5 in Italy, during a bilateral with us, he said three things: ‘I extended my hand and they did not answer’; ‘We need to solve the nuclear dossier’; ‘And I need friends to say what I cannot say’. What we did in the end, because we thought it was the right thing to do, with a lot of work and facing hardships, was exactly what the Americans wanted. One month before the deal I thought it would not happen. But then we received a letter from Obama, and to my greatest surprise, that was a reiteration of the same initial three points.
Hillary always had a different position. I foresaw her reaction as a possibility. We talked on the phone, in Madrid, when I was coming back from Iran, and I said, ‘Look, in Brazil we have this expression, ‘I didn’t read it, and I didn’t like it’. She did not want a deal. In a phone call before my trip, she was adding some other points of discussion and I said, ‘Hillary, this is a trust-building agreement. And these points that you mention were not in the letter delivered by your own President’. I’m not exaggerating, what followed was a silence lasting half a minute. So I thought; did she read the letter? Or she read it, and because they are a great power they can do what they want, and we have to take it, and adapt to it?
So what about China and Russia accepting the American line – no deal, more sanctions?
I know the sweeteners that made them accept it – concessions on the sanctions front. But geopolitically…
What’s your informed hypothesis?
There are two. This was a problem they did not solve. Who’s part of the global directory? The five permanent members of the Security Council. Now we have two developing countries, who are not even part of the Security Council, and they solve it? By coincidence, both were non-permanent members of the Security Council at the time. The other thing is whenever we are discussing a nuclear issue, the five get closer, because they are all nuclear powers."
"Venezuela’s Gold: 3 Times State Wealth in Western Banks “Mysteriously” Vanished".  Frankly, these Assholian - and lackey - banks (and judicial systems) are so crooked that you have to assume that any and all deposits with them are lost.  Since their reputations are all they have, it is a miracle anybody still has any dealings with them.

"Venezuela: What Activists Need To Know About The US-Led Coup" (Zeese/Flowers).

Another analysis of the constitutional problems facing 'Guido' and his bosses:  "The Failure of Guaido’s Constitutional Claim to the Presidency of Venezuela" (Kay).

"Coup in Venezuela: What Next?" (Teruggi).  "Venezuela Will Not Be an Easy Win for Donald Trump" (Purcell). I think he's already lost.  They shot the wad with a tiny attempt at a military uprising, easily suppressed, and there is nothing left to do.  This may work out for the best.  The Venezuelan government was stagnating, seemingly unable to get out of its economic problems (even bearing in mind that most of them are caused by the Americans).  This kind of outside threat tends to focus the mind.

Speaking of 'Guido's' bosses, infamous Trump haters and Joint Presidents Bolton and Abrams are already starting to show some desperation:  ""5,000 Troops To Colombia" To Quell Venezuela Crisis? John Bolton Flashes Notepad Contents At Briefing" (Durden).

"Israel's Story" (Giraldi).  "US Senate advances controversial anti-BDS legislation".

"Intel: Why Israel is recognizing the opposition in Venezuela" (Zaken).

"Syria and Iran Sign Strategic Economic Plan, including Tartus Naval Base".

Why its so hard to find ISIS in Syria - it has been redeployed by the Assholians elsewhere:  "Daesh Militants Transfered From Pakistan to Tajikistan – Russian Official". "US Caught Helping ISIS Commanders Escape from Prison in Afghanistan".

"NewsGuard: A Neoconservative Contrivance Which Promotes an Establishment View" (Giraldi).  You know this isn't going to work.  People will immediately start seeing red tags as a kind of seal of authenticity, and green tags as a sign of forced goodthink.  The next step will have to be having libraries refuse to show red-tagged sites, and then move on to having them banned completely.

"Impotence, substance abuse, brain tumors? New docs reveal ultra-creepy Google ad tracking".

Tweet (The War Nerd) (and Norton):
"Remember the Guardian's Simon Tisdall, who wrote that hilarious article on Idlib as bastion of feminist freedom? Well ol' Simon seems to have quite a record. @medialens found some other classics of his, old and new:"
In these last few months that we are still allowed to (sort of) communicate on the internet, before (((they))) 'shut it down' for too much 'knowing', a lot of 'journalists' are being outed for what they really are, and it is quite amusing in a tragic way.

Tweet (Boots Riley):
"You are an economist with the Brookings Institute, whose staff has many ex-CIA in it. You and the Brookings Institute are a huge part of the world's problems, and have advised the US on how to starve countries and extort them to broaden corporate markets. Shut the fuck up."
blog comments powered by Disqus