…by Jonas E. Alexis
William Binney is a former intelligence official with National Security Agency (NSA). He is also a mathematician. He has recently grabbed the Neocon and Zionist gangsters by the horn and declared that “Russiagate” is complete crap. He said:
“If the idiots in the intelligence community expect us to believe them after all the crap they have told us (like WMD’s in Iraq and ‘no we don’t collect data on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans’) then they need to give clear proof of what they say. So far, they have failed to prove anything.”
That certainly is fair enough. You simply cannot make an outrageous accusation and then leave the scene without providing an iota of evidence. If you ask Mr. X for the evidence that the Russiagate thing is legitimate, he would respond by saying Mr. Y has it; when you ask Mr. Y, he says Mr. Z has it; when you ask Mr. Z, he says Mr. X has it. The Neocons and Zionist ethnic cleansers have been playing this game for quite a long time. They think that positing an assertion and repeating it over and over again somehow is evidence for the assertion itself.
Binney certainly nailed it precisely because the same Russiagate people are the ones who bled the Middle East to death. Remember what happened in Iraq again? As former CIA officer Paul R. Pillar put it,
“The [Bush] administration realized that a tremendous, noholds-barred sales job was needed to persuade the American public to support a departure from a tradition of nonaggression…The [WMD] campaign was supported by a relentless effort to dig up whatever bits of reporting could be construed as showing that Iraq was an immediate threat.”
In 2001, William Kristol, Francis Fukuyama, Norman Podhoretz, Bill Bennett, Aaron Friedberg, Nicholas Eberstadt, Rudy Boshwitz, Martin Peretz, Stephen P. Rosen, Richard Perle, Henry Sokolski, Donald Kagan, among twenty-eight other neoconservatives, sent a letter to President Bush making a similar request. The letter stated in part:
“But even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. Failure to undertake such an effort will constitute an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism. The United States must therefore provide full military and financial support to the Iraqi opposition…
“A serious and victorious war on terrorism will require a large increase in defense spending. Fighting this war may well require the United States to engage a well-armed foe, and will also require that we remain capable of defending our interests elsewhere in the world. We urge that there be no hesitation in requesting whatever funds for defense are needed to allow us to win this war.”
Yet, this emphasis on funding the Iraq War has had overwhelmingly negative consequences for the American economy. Just because we consider Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro to be bad guys doesn’t mean that we go to war with Cuba; so why was the situation with Hussein handled differently? Well, Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, Saddam had…
After months of perpetuating complete lies and fabrications, the Neocons ended up destroying virtually everything in Iraq. The Neocons crafted an essentially diabolical argument that would give the United States legitimate grounds to go to war. Historian George C. Herring says that the Neocons
“formed a sort of ‘cabal’ under the younger Bush…In their view, Saddam Hussein was behind world terrorism and would soon have WMD. Many of them had close ties to Israel and insisted that Saddam’s overthrow would make that vital ally more secure.”
And now the same people want to bleed another country by a total “crap”? Perhaps it is time for the American people to say in unison: We ain’t buying it.
 Paul R. Pillar, Intelligence and U.S. Foreign Policy (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011), 14.
 Archived at http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter.htm.
 George C. Herring, From Colony to Superpower: U.S. Foreign Relations since 1776 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), 945.
Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the book, Kevin MacDonald’s Metaphysical Failure: A Philosophical, Historical, and Moral Critique of Evolutionary Psychology, Sociobiology, and Identity Politics. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.
We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully InformedIn fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming educated opinion. In addition, to get a clear comprehension of VT's independent non-censored media, please read our Policies and Disclosures.
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT. About VT - Comment Policy
Comments are closed.