State Department resources “for sale”? Oversight Committee requests more documents from John Kerry

From Town Hall

by Katie Pavlich
Aug 26, 2016

New revelations this week showing the Clinton Foundation used the State Department to find and recruit employees during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary are prompting questions from House Oversight Committee Jason Chaffetz.

In a letter sent to Secretary of State John Kerry Thursday, Chaffetz wants details about taxpayers resources used to recruit State Department experts for Clinton Foundation donors and wants to know whether federal ethics codes were violated in the process.

“State Department employees interviewed applicants for Clinton Foundation positions  and sought a Libya expert on behalf of Clinton Foundation donors. According to one report, Clinton Foundation employees also contacted the State Department in an effort to find jobs for Clinton Foundation donors. Moreover, earlier this week, the Associated Press reported ‘[m]ore than half the people outside of government who met with [Secretary] Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money – either personally or through companies or groups – to the Clinton Foundation.’ These reports give rise to a perception that access to our State Department’s official resources, were for sale,” Chaffetz states in the letter. “The allegations contained in the Associated Press report and others also raise questions as to whether State Department employees acted to benefit the Clinton Foundation in violation of executive branch ethics guidelines.”

“In addition, work on behalf of the Clinton Foundation on personal time may also violate section 2635.705 of the executive branch ethics code, which generally prohibits a superior from coercing a subordinate from performing activities other than official duties,” the letter continues.

Earlier this week the Associated Press published a report showing 50 percent of individuals who were granted interviews with Secretary Clinton were big time donors to the Clinton Foundation. We also learned long time Clinton aide Huma Abedin regularly denied requested meetings with Secretary Clinton, rerouted individuals through the Clinton Foundation, donations would be made and then meetings would be granted. Chaffetz makes the argument in his letter to Kerry that these revelations further show official State Department resources were “up for sale.”

Chaffetz has requested Kerry produce a number of documents, communications and a list of all individuals on Clinton’s official calendar during her time as Secretary by September 7.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2016/08/26/oversight-comittee-to-john-kerry-explain-why-state-department-was-used-to-find-clinton-foundation-employees-n2210369

Posted under Fair Use Rules

Advertisements

Look to the Netherlands for Clinton Foundation’s ongoing source of cash

From the Canada Free Press
By —— Bio and Archives August 28, 2016

Takeover of America through the compromise by foreign governments of Hillary Rodham Clinton

It’s the ever-gurgling running water from the taps of the borderless Postcode Lotteries that’s enriching the Clinton Foundation, a fact that seems to be passing straight over the heads of investigative authorities trying to source the Foundation’s steady cash flow.

Tragically, just like its most infamous member, Hillary Clinton, the corrupt Clinton Foundation, sustained by millions of dollars from Postcode Lotteries,  will never be brought down by FBI investigation.

Even if the Foundation were forced to send back billions to foreign countries who bought into Hillary Clinton political favors when she was Barack Obama’s Secretary of State, the Foundation would thrive and go on because investigating authorities do not know where to go to turn off the Foundation’s free-running, borderless taps.

Little wonder that Bill Clinton, on the Postcode Lottery board of directors to this very day, crowed back in 2009: “The (Postcode) lottery is the best thing I’ve seen”.

How do you turn the tap off on the “best thing ever seen”?

“The National Postcode Lottery, the second largest lottery in The Netherlands, has donated over $25 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation.” (The Dutch Government, the Clinton Foundation and the Postcode Lottery, Aug. 13, 2016)

And that’s just the amount that shows on Foundation books.

In essence, the Clintons have won the biggest lottery of all time.

In coming up with a fail-proof scheme—one that uses million s of unsuspecting lottery ticket buyers in a market now going worldwide—the Clintons, you might say, won the lottery and are running Western society into the ground with it.

Continue reading

Former U.S. diplomat: ‘These are radical Islamic jihadi terror groups’; U.S. supporting Syrian groups that use chemical weapons, but media won’t report it

From the article comment section:

  • Can someone change the title of the article to: “US ordering Syrian groups to use chemical weapons, but media won’t report it.”
  • Headline correction: ‘US posing as Syrian groups which use illegal chemical weapons against civilians”…
  • of course their media will not report that. they want to give the impression that us moderate head choppers are nice people who are fighting for a jeffersonian democracy and temporarily launching suicide attacks and behead people
  • …is American people aware of this insanity of its Government??? …are they just as evil as their Government?

From RT
August 4, 2016
Video on website

© Stringer
© Stringer / Reuters

We keep hearing about a ‘moderate opposition’ instead of calling them what they are. These are radical Islamic jihadi terror groups, Jim Jatras, former U.S. diplomat and GOP Senate policy adviser, told RT.

RT: Given the complex situation on the ground it is always difficult to determine who has done what, but with the repeated allegations, why does the U.S. continue to support groups which are being accused of committing war crimes?

Jim Jatras: I wish I knew the answer to that question. They’ve been doing it for five years, and of course you know that the American media don’t make it real clear the nature of the groups we’re supporting in Syria. We keep hearing about a moderate opposition instead of calling them what they are. These are radical Islamic jihadi terror groups – the same ones we keep saying we’re worried about launching attacks here in the United States. And here we are supporting groups in Syria that have this jihadist ideology, cut off heads of little kids, use chemical weapons and I don’t think the American people really make the connection because the media does not report it.

RT: What is the red line, that if the group crosses, the U.S. might stop backing it? Isn’t the beheading of a child or the use of prohibited weapons enough to put an end to supporting a particular group?

JJ: I think what it likely to resolve it in another sense is by what’s happening on the battlefield. The reason these two chemical attacks were launched, clearly is a false flag in the case of the one that landed in opposition-controlled territory, is to try to pull a rabbit out of the hat to stop the Syrian Army’s offensive in Aleppo, supported by the Russian Air Force. If Aleppo is liberated this was is going to be effectively over. It will take some time, but there won’t be any question any more which way things are going militarily. Maybe that’s got to be the solution because I don’t see the open-mindedness here in Washington. Quite the contrary. Remember the letter from the 51 diplomats at the State Department. And Hillary Clinton has indicated through her puppet Michele Flournoy, her designated secretary of defense, that if things are still going like this in January… they want to launch airstrikes against Assad. I don’t see an open mind here in Washington.

RT: Such a chemical attack against civilians is a deplorable method. What would the Syrian Army have to gain from such tactics?

JJ: Sure it is. But it begs credibility to suggest that this came from the [Syrian] government. Why would they do that? They are advancing on Aleppo. These are not – as far as anybody can tell – weapons-grade gas attacks, at least from what I’ve heard on the news reports. It seems to be more of what is known as ‘kitchen gas’ variety that is certainly within the capabilities of these terrorist groups. It makes perfect sense that’s where it would come from. And frankly, I don’t think it’s going to wash with anybody here.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/354621-us-media-washington-syria/

‘US foreign policy is a marketing strategy for selling weapons’ – Jill Stein

From RT

July 31, 2017

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein © Dominick Reuter
Democrats and Republicans are controlled by banks, oil giants, insurance companies and war profiteers, says Green Party presidential candidate, Dr. Jill Stein. Her party, she claims, gets no money from corporations and has liberty to really address problems.

According to Dr Stein, in the current presidential race, the American public is “clamoring for something else at unprecedented levels”.

People have rejected not only both of these parties, which are minority parties by actual polling…Their candidates are running at record levels, all time highest for people disliking the Democratic and Republican candidates,” she said.

The American people and the people all over the world are being thrown under the bus by this political system…in which both parties are basically funded by and controlled by predatory banks, by fossil-fuel giants, by war-profiteers, the health insurance industry – the usual suspects who are calling the shots from behind the closed doors,” Stein says.

Stein says that since her campaign and the Green Party “are the only candidates and party” that do not take money from corporations and lobbyists, and do not have super PACs, they have “the liberty to address the crises” that the US people are facing.

‘What Trump says has already been done by Clinton’

Speaking about the frontrunners, the Green Party candidate noted that if you “look at the track record, the terrible things that Donald Trump says – which are truly reprehensible and horrific – have actually been done by Hillary Clinton”.

For example, she said, “on immigrants, xenophobia and hate mongering, we’ve learned that Trump and the Republicans are the party of hate and fear”. But, Stein went on, “the Democrats are the party of deportation, detentions, and night raids”.

And the night-raiding is carried out against the women and children “who are feeling the violence that Hillary Clinton herself gave the thumbs up to with this horrific corporate coup in Honduras”.

US policies very much promoted by “Clinton herself are generating these refugees, which she then, and the Democrats, are criminalizing when they get here and sending them back,” says Stein.

Speaking about security issues – “finger on nuclear button”, as she put it, the Green Party candidate noted that Trump makes “irresponsible statements” and Clinton advocates the enforcing of a no-fly zone over Syria “against a nuclear armed country that is Russia.”

Clinton has already been antagonizing Russia by surrounding it with missile bases and soldiers, Stein said. “How would we feel if Russian troops were amassing on the border of Mexico and Canada?” she added.

Trump – product of economic misery created by Clintons

Dr Stein has called Donald Trump “a product” of economic misery, which created vulnerability, fear, and sense of dread on behalf of the American worker and middle class, “to whom adversity is somewhat new”.

They become very vulnerable to demagoguery, to wishful memory about ‘how we can recreate a powerful America of the past’,” she said. But not much is being asked about what caused this misery. In Stein’s opinion, this goes back to Wall Street deregulation “and the economic crash” that resulted in disappearance of millions of jobs, “stole five million homes out from under home owners, and to NAFTA which basically allowed a million jobs and more to be sent overseas and for wages to be pushed downward.”

The Wall Street deregulation passed by Bill Clinton was advocated for and celebrated by Hillary Clinton, she said.

So, putting another Clinton in the White House – that’s not a solution; that was the problem, that is only going to fan the flames of right-wing extremism,” Stein said.

‘We bailed out crooks, time to bail out their victims’

The real solution would be economic investments in a form of a Green New Deal like the one that got the US out of the Great Depression and job-creation, the Green Party candidate said.

This is not a kind of pie in the sky that we can fix this. The real solution here is economic investment; it’s job creation; it’s not wish fulfilment about how Donald Trump is going to cut a better deal for us. Donald Trump leaves a lake of bankruptcies and lawsuits behind him from workers who’ve been cheated, and jobs that have been sent overseas. So, Big Daddy is not the Big Daddy that we need,” she said.

The Green Party, she insists, can grow the economy in a just and sustainable way. Her campaign suggests cancelling the student debt that affected about 40 million people “like we cancelled the debt for the Wall Street crooks who crashed the economy.”

If we bailed out the crooks, it’s time to bail out their victims through the same tool of quantitative easing that doesn’t cost taxpayers a thing…” Jill Stein said.

Demilitarizing foreign policy

The US spends a trillion dollars a year on its military, says Jill Stein. If that budget is cut it in half, the American economy will have the money it needs at home to provide for free public higher education, insure any health costs that aren’t covered already and work with other countries to address the problem of climate change – which remains one of the crucial problems globally, she believes.

Few people know what we pay for this catastrophic military which shoots first and asks questions later. In fact, what we have is a foreign policy which is essentially a marketing strategy for selling weapons,” she said. “We’ve had these wars for oil – which are opportunities to sell weapons and to come and dear other people’s fossil fuel resources, which is basically what our military is doing. Why do we have a thousand bases for a hundred countries around the world?  This isn’t something that other countries do.

The reason why the US keeps doing so is to safeguard its energy supplies and their routes of transportation, Stein says.

This can no longer be justified – it’s all obsolete when we have a Green New Deal, which will reach 100 percent wind, water and sun clean renewable energy entirely by 2030. So, we can begin phasing down this network and stop stealing other people’s oil right now,” she said.

The US spent six trillion dollars on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq – both of which failed, the presidential candidate said.

The US killed a million people in Iraq alone, “not winning the hearts and minds of people in the Middle East to say the least. And what do we have for it? Failed states, mass refuge migrations that are tearing apart Europe as well as the Middle East, and creating worse terrorist threats,” she added.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/354079-jill-stein-green-us-elections/

O poder do “não”, por Dmitri Orlov

26/7/2016, Dmitri Orlov, Club Orlov

[ru. НеT, “nyet“]

“Ainda hoje sou capaz de visualizá-lo – palidamente limpo, tristemente respeitável, incuravelmente pobre! Era Bartleby. (…) Imagine minha surpresa, ou melhor, minha consternação, quando, sem se mover de sua privacidade, Bartleby respondeu num tom de voz singularmente suave e firme: – ‘Prefiro não fazer’. (…) – ‘Prefere não fazer?!’ – repeti, levantando-me alterado e cruzando a sala a passos largos. ‘O que você quer dizer com isso? Você está maluco? Quero que você me ajude a comparar esta folha aqui, tome, empurrei o papel em sua direção. É uma ordem.’ – ‘Prefiro não fazer’ – disse.” (p. 15-18) 
MELVILLE, Hermann
 [1819-1981], Bartleby, o Escrevente – Uma história de Wall Street e Outras Histórias, pp. 7-53, trad. Cassia Zanon, Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira, s/d inhttps://leidsoncvsenac.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/miololivro.pdf *

Traduzido pelo Coletivo Vila Vudu

Putin: “Oh, coitado desse idiota. Não é capaz de compreender que vamos dizer ‘nyet’ outra vez.”
Nesse mundo, supõe-se que as coisas funcionem do seguinte modo: nos EUA, as estruturas do poder (públicas e privadas) decidem o que querem que o resto do mundo faça. Comunicam seus desejos por canais oficiais e não oficiais, contando com cooperação automática. Se a cooperação não acontece imediatamente, aplicam pressões políticas, financeiras e econômicas. Se ainda assim não se produz o efeito desejado, tentam mudança de regime mediante revolução colorida ou golpe militar, ou organizam uma insurgência que leve a ataques terroristas e guerra civil na nação recalcitrante. Se nem isso funciona, bombardeiam o país até mandá-lo de volta à idade da pedra. Foi assim que sempre funcionou nos anos 1990s e 2000s. Recentemente porém, uma nova dinâmica emergiu.
De início era centrada na Rússia, mas o fenômeno em seguida espalhou-se pelo mundo e, agora, acaba de engolir os próprios EUA. Funciona do seguinte modo: os EUA decidem o que querem que a Rússia faça e comunicam seus desejos, contando com automática cooperação. A Rússia responde “Nyet.” Os EUA imediatamente recorrem aos passos acima relacionados, mas sem a campanha de bombardeamento, antes de cujo início são contidos pela ferramenta de contenção nuclear da Rússia. A resposta continua: “Nyet.” Poder-se-ia imaginar talvez que alguém inteligente dentro da estrutura de poder dos EUA refletiria e diria: “Consideradas as evidências que temos à vista, dar ordens à Rússia não funciona; tentemos negociar de boa-fé, em termos de igualdade, quem sabe?” E todos os demais batem na testa e dizem “Uau! Brilhante! Por que não pensamos nisso?!” Mas, não. A pessoa que pensou antes dos demais será demitida no mesmo dia, porque, sacomé, a hegemonia norte-americana global não é negociável. Assim sendo, o que acontece é que os norte-americanos se irritam, reagrupam-se e tentam outra vez, com o que oferecem ao mundo espetáculo engraçadíssimo.
Todo o imbróglio Edward Snowden foi especialmente engraçado de ver. Os EUA exigiram a extradição. Os russos disseram “Nyet, nossa Constituição russa nos impede.” E então, hilárias, algumas vozes no ocidente puseram-se a exigir (sic) que a Rússia alterasse a própria Constituição! A resposta, que dispensa tradução, foi “Quá-quá-rá-quá-quá“.
Menos engraçado é o impasse em torno da Síria: os norte-americanos só fazem exigir, sem parar, que a Rússia vá adiante com o plano dos EUA para derrubar Bashar Assad. A imutável resposta russa é: “Nyet, os sírios decidirão quem os governará, não Rússia e não EUA.” Cada vez que ouvem essa resposta, os norte-americanos fazem cara de quem não consegue entender, coçam a cabeça e… fazem tudo outra vez.
Recentemente, John Kerry esteve em Moscou, numa “sessão de negociação” maratona com Putin e Lavrov. Acima, na abertura, há uma foto de Kerry em conversa com Putin e Lavrov em Moscou, há uma semana mais ou menos, e é impossível não ler o que dizem as respectivas expressões faciais. Lá está Kerry, de costas para a câmera, dizendo aquelas bobagens de sempre. O rosto de Lavrov diz claramente “Não acredito que eu tenha de ficar aqui sentado e ouvir todo esse bobajol outra vez…” O rosto de Putin diz: “Oh, coitado desse idiota. Não é capaz de compreender que vamos dizer ‘nyet’ outra vez.” Kerry voou para casa com mais um “nyet.”
Pior ainda, outros países estão agora começando também a entrar na mesma ação. Os norte-americanos disseram aos britânicos exatamente como queriam que votassem; os britânicos disseram “nyet” e votaram pelo Brexit. Os norte-americanos disseram aos europeus que eram obrigados a aceitar a horrenda dominação pelo poder das grandes empresas chamada hoje de Parceria Trans-Atlântico de Comércio e Investimento [ing. Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)], e os franceses disseram “nyet, não será aprovada.” Os EUA organizaram mais um golpe militar na Turquia para substituir Erdoǧan por alguém que não daria mole à Rússia, e os turcos disseram também “nyet” a mais essa ideia.
E agora, horror dos horrores, lá está Donald Trump dizendo “nyet” ao diabo vezes quatro – à OTAN, à deslocalização dos empregos dos norte-americanos, a deixar entrar uma inundação de migrantes, à globalização, às armas para nazistas ucranianos, ao livre comércio…
O efeito psicológico corrosivo de tantos “nyet” na psique hegemonista norte-americana não pode ser subestimado. Se todos esperam que você pense e aja como hegemon, mas só consegue manter em operação o setor “pense”, o resultado é o que se chama dissonância cognitiva. Se o seu negócio é abusar de nações e pessoas pelo mundo, mas as nações e pessoas não mais se deixam abusar, o seu negócio vira piada. E você, doido varrido, doido de amarrar.
A doideira resultante produziu recentemente um interessante sintoma: vários office-boys servidores do Departamento de Estado (diplomatas e outros) assinaram uma carta – imediatamente vazada – exigindo imediata campanha de bombardeio contra a Síria, para derrubar Bashar Assad. Di-plo-ma-tas. Diplomacia é a arte de falar e, pelas palavras, evitar guerras. Diplomatas que ‘exigem’ guerra não agem lá muito… diplomaticamente. Pode-se argumentar que são diplomatas incompetentes, mas não basta, porque não são só incompetentes (incontáveis diplomatas competentes deixaram o serviço diplomático durante o segundo governo Bush, quase todos desgostosos por ter de mentir incansavelmente sobre os motivos para a invasão dos EUA ao Iraque e aquela guerra). Os que assinaram a tal carta são belicistas doentios, pervertidos nada diplomáticos. É tamanho o poder daquela palavrinha russa, que aqueles supostos diplomatas enlouqueceram completamente.
Mas seria injusto destacar só o Departamento de Estado. É como se todo o corpo político norte-americano estivesse infectado por emanações pútridas. O miasma tudo permeia e torna a vida uma desgraça, uma miséria. Apesar dos crescentes problemas, muitas outras coisas nos EUA permanecem ainda administráveis, de certo modo, mas essa tal coisa – o esgotamento da capacidade para abusar de todos em todo o mundo – arruína o resto.
É verão, meados do verão, e o país está na praia. A toalha de praia está comida de traças e esfarrapada; o guarda-sol tem buracos e varetas quebradas, os refrigerantes no isopor são envenenados com químicas imundas e a leitura de verão é só tédio… e logo ali, além do mais, há uma baleia morta que se decompõe ao sol e cujo nome é “Nyet.” Era o que faltava para arruinar, de vez, o meio ambiente!
Os troncos falantes da ‘mídia’ e políticos do establishment já estão dolorosamente cientes desse problema, e a reação deles, previsível, é culpar o que veem como fonte primeira de todos os males: a Rússia, convenientemente personificada por Putin.
“Quem não votar em Clinton, estará votando em Putin” – diz a mais recente sandice ‘de campanha’. Outra, diz que Trump seria agente de Putin. Qualquer figura pública que não assuma posição militante a favor do establishment é automaticamente declarada “idiota putinista útil”. Tomadas pelo valor manifesto, são bobagens, patetices, valem nada. Mas há uma explicação profunda para todas elas: o que as conecta entre si, todas essas imbecilidades, é o poder daquele “nyet.” Votar em Sanders é uma modalidade de voto- “nyet“: o establishment Democrata produziu uma candidata e mandou os eleitores votarem nela, e a maioria dos jovens norte-americanos responderam “nyet.” O mesmo aconteceu com Trump: o establishment Republicano empoderou os seus Sete Anões e mandou sua gente votar em qualquer deles. Outra vez, a maioria da classe trabalhadora branca norte-americana humilhada e assaltada disse “nyet” e votou na Branca de Neve outsider.
É sinal estimulante, que tanta gente no mundo dominado por Washington esteja descobrindo o poder do “nyet.” Oestablishment pode ainda parecer sólido, mas só pelo lado de fora. Por baixo da fina demão de tinta nova, o casco está podre, com água entrando por todas as frestas. Um “nyet” bem forte, que ecoe e vibre, com certeza fará rachar o casco, com o que se fará espaço para algumas mudanças muito necessárias. Quando acontecer, os norte-americanos lembrem, por favor, de agradecer à Rússia… ou… como tanto insistem, a Putin.*****

From Pol Pot to ISIS: The blood never dried

In 2013, the former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas revealed that “two years before the Arab spring”, he was told in London that a war on Syria was planned. “I am going to tell you something,” he said in an interview with the French TV channel LPC, “I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business. I met top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria… Britain was organising an invasion of rebels into Syria. They even asked me, although I was no longer Minister for Foreign Affairs, if I would like to participate… This operation goes way back. It was prepared, preconceived and planned.”

Global Research, November 17, 2015
JohnPilger.com 16 November 2015

In transmitting President Richard Nixon’s orders for a “massive” bombing of Cambodia in 1969, Henry Kissinger said, “Anything that flies on everything that moves”. As Barack Obama wages his seventh war against the Muslim world since he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, and Francois Hollande promises a “merciless” attack on that ruined country, the orchestrated hysteria and lies make one almost nostalgic for Kissinger’s murderous honesty.

As a witness to the human consequences of aerial savagery – including the beheading of victims, their parts festooning trees and fields – I am not surprised by the disregard of memory and history, yet again. A telling example is the rise to power of Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge, who had much in common with today’s Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). They, too, were ruthless medievalists who began as a small sect. They, too, were the product of an American-made apocalypse, this time in Asia.

According to Pol Pot, his movement had consisted of “fewer than 5,000 poorly armed guerrillas uncertain about their strategy, tactics, loyalty and leaders”. Once Nixon’s and Kissinger’s B-52 bombers had gone to work as part of “Operation Menu”, the west’s ultimate demon could not believe his luck. The Americans dropped the equivalent of five Hiroshimas on rural Cambodia during 1969-73. They leveled village after village, returning to bomb the rubble and corpses. The craters left giant necklaces of carnage, still visible from the air. The terror was unimaginable. A former Khmer Rouge official described how the survivors “froze up and they would wander around mute for three or four days.

Terrified and half-crazy, the people were ready to believe what they were told… That was what made it so easy for the Khmer Rouge to win the people over.” A Finnish Government Commission of Inquiry estimated that 600,000 Cambodians died in the ensuing civil war and described the bombing as the “first stage in a decade of genocide”. What Nixon and Kissinger began, Pol Pot, their beneficiary, completed. Under their bombs, the Khmer Rouge grew to a formidable army of 200,000.

ISIS has a similar past and present. By most scholarly measure, Bush and Blair’s invasion of Iraq in 2003 led to the deaths of at least 700,000 people – in a country that had no history of jihadism. The Kurds had done territorial and political deals; Sunni and Shia had class and sectarian differences, but they were at peace; intermarriage was common. Three years before the invasion, I drove the length of Iraq without fear. On the way I met people proud, above all, to be Iraqis, the heirs of a civilization that seemed, for them, a presence.

Bush and Blair blew all this to bits. Iraq is now a nest of jihadism. Al-Qaeda – like Pol Pot’s “jihadists” – seized the opportunity provided by the onslaught of ‘Shock and Awe’ and the civil war that followed. “Rebel” Syria offered even greater rewards, with CIA and Gulf state ratlines of weapons, logistics and money running through Turkey. The arrival of foreign recruits was inevitable. A former British ambassador, Oliver Miles, wrote, “The [Cameron] government seems to be following the example of Tony Blair, who ignored consistent advice from the Foreign Office, MI5 and MI6 that our Middle East policy – and in particular our Middle East wars – had been a principal driver in the recruitment of Muslims in Britain for terrorism here.”

ISIS is the progeny of those in Washington, London and Paris who, in conspiring to destroy Iraq, Syria and Libya, committed an epic crime against humanity. Like Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, ISIS are the mutations of a western state terror dispensed by a venal imperial elite undeterred by the consequences of actions taken at great remove in distance and culture. Their culpability is unmentionable in “our” societies, making accomplices of those who suppress this critical truth.

It is 23 years since a holocaust enveloped Iraq, immediately after the first Gulf War, when the US and Britain hijacked the United Nations Security Council and imposed punitive “sanctions” on the Iraqi population – ironically, reinforcing the domestic authority of Saddam Hussein. It was like a medieval siege. Almost everything that sustained a modern state was, in the jargon, “blocked” – from chlorine for making the water supply safe to school pencils, parts for X-ray machines, common painkillers and drugs to combat previously unknown cancers carried in the dust from the southern battlefields contaminated with Depleted Uranium. Just before Christmas 1999, the Department of Trade and Industry in London restricted the export of vaccines meant to protect Iraqi children against diphtheria and yellow fever. Kim Howells, parliamentary Under-Secretary of State in the Blair government, explained why. “The children’s vaccines”, he said, “were capable of being used in weapons of mass destruction”. The British Government could get away with such an outrage because media reporting of Iraq – much of it manipulated by the Foreign Office – blamed Saddam Hussein for everything.

Under a bogus “humanitarian” Oil for Food Programme, $100 was allotted for each Iraqi to live on for a year. This figure had to pay for the entire society’s infrastructure and essential services, such as power and water. “Imagine,” the UN Assistant Secretary General, Hans Von Sponeck, told me, “setting that pittance against the lack of clean water, and the fact that the majority of sick people cannot afford treatment, and the sheer trauma of getting from day to day, and you have a glimpse of the nightmare. And make no mistake, this is deliberate. I have not in the past wanted to use the word genocide, but now it is unavoidable.” Disgusted, Von Sponeck resigned as UN Humanitarian Co-ordinator in Iraq. His predecessor, Denis Halliday, an equally distinguished senior UN official, had also resigned. “I was instructed,” Halliday said, “to implement a policy that satisfies the definition of genocide: a deliberate policy that has effectively killed well over a million individuals, children and adults.”

A study by the United Nations Children’s Fund, Unicef, found that between 1991 and 1998, the height of the blockade, there were 500,000 “excess” deaths of Iraqi infants under the age of five. An American TV reporter put this to Madeleine Albright, US Ambassador to the United Nations, asking her, “Is the price worth it?” Albright replied, “We think the price is worth it.”

In 2007, the senior British official responsible for the sanctions, Carne Ross, known as “Mr. Iraq”, told a parliamentary selection committee, “[The US and UK governments] effectively denied the entire population a means to live.” When I interviewed Carne Ross three years later, he was consumed by regret and contrition. “I feel ashamed,” he said. He is today a rare truth-teller of how governments deceive and how a compliant media plays a critical role in disseminating and maintaining the deception. “We would feed [journalists] factoids of sanitised intelligence,” he said, “or we’d freeze them out.” Last year, a not untypical headline in the Guardian read: “Faced with the horror of Isis we must act.” The “we must act” is a ghost risen, a warning of the suppression of informed memory, facts, lessons learned and regrets or shame. The author of the article was Peter Hain, the former Foreign Office minister responsible for Iraq under Blair. In 1998, when Denis Halliday revealed the extent of the suffering in Iraq for which the Blair Government shared primary responsibility, Hain abused him on the BBC’s Newsnight as an “apologist for Saddam”. In 2003, Hain backed Blair’s invasion of stricken Iraq on the basis of transparent lies. At a subsequent Labour Party conference, he dismissed the invasion as a “fringe issue”.

Here was Hain demanding “air strikes, drones, military equipment and other support” for those “facing genocide” in Iraq and Syria. This will further “the imperative of a political solution”. The day Hain’s article appeared, Denis Halliday and Hans Von Sponeck happened to be in London and came to visit me. They were not shocked by the lethal hypocrisy of a politician, but lamented the enduring, almost inexplicable absence of intelligent diplomacy in negotiating a semblance of truce. Across the world, from Northern Ireland to Nepal, those regarding each other as terrorists and heretics have faced each other across a table. Why not now in Iraq and Syria? Instead, there is a vapid, almost sociopathic verboseness from Cameron, Hollande, Obama and their “coalition of the willing” as they prescribe more violence delivered from 30,000 feet on places where the blood of previous adventures never dried. They seem to relish their own violence and stupidityso much they want it to overthrow their one potentially valuable ally, the government in Syria.

This is nothing new, as the following leaked UK-US intelligence file illustrates:

“In order to facilitate the action of liberative [sic] forces… a special effort should be made to eliminate certain key individuals [and] to proceed with internal disturbances in Syria. CIA is prepared, and SIS (MI6) will attempt to mount minor sabotage and coup de main [sic] incidents within Syria, working through contacts with individuals… a necessary degree of fear… frontier and [staged] border clashes [will] provide a pretext for intervention… the CIA and SIS should use… capabilities in both psychological and action fields to augment tension.”

That was written in 1957, although it could have been written yesterday. In the imperial world, nothing essentially changes. In 2013, the former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas revealed that “two years before the Arab spring”, he was told in London that a war on Syria was planned. “I am going to tell you something,” he said in an interview with the French TV channel LPC, “I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business. I met top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria… Britain was organising an invasion of rebels into Syria. They even asked me, although I was no longer Minister for Foreign Affairs, if I would like to participate… This operation goes way back. It was prepared, preconceived and planned.”

The only effective opponents of ISIS are accredited demons of the west – Syria, Iran, Hezbollah and now Russia. The obstacle is Turkey, an “ally” and a member of Nato, which has conspired with the CIA, MI6 and the Gulf medievalists to channel support to the Syrian “rebels”, including those now calling themselves ISIS. Supporting Turkey in its long-held ambition for regional dominance by overthrowing the Assad government beckons a major conventional war and the horrific dismemberment of the most ethnically diverse state in the Middle East.

A truce – however difficult to negotiate and achieve – is the only way out of this maze; otherwise, the atrocities in Paris and Beirut will be repeated. Together with a truce, the leading perpetrators and overseers of violence in the Middle East – the Americans and Europeans – must themselves “de-radicalise” and demonstrate a good faith to alienated Muslim communities everywhere, including those at home. There should be an immediate cessation of all shipments of war materials to Israel and recognition of the State of Palestine. The issue of Palestine is the region’s most festering open wound, and the oft-stated justification for the rise of Islamic extremism. Osama bin Laden made that clear. Palestine also offers hope. Give justice to the Palestinians and you begin to change the world around them.

More than 40 years ago, the Nixon-Kissinger bombing of Cambodia unleashed a torrent of suffering from which that country has never recovered. The same is true of the Blair-Bush crime in Iraq, and the Nato and “coalition” crimes in Libya and Syria.

With impeccable timing, Henry Kissinger’s latest self-serving tome has been released with its satirical title, “World Order”. In one fawning review, Kissinger is described as a “key shaper of a world order that remained stable for a quarter of a century”. Tell that to the people of Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Chile, East Timor and all the other victims of his “statecraft”. Only when “we” recognise the war criminals in our midst and stop denying ourselves the truth will the blood begin to dry.