Trump
stelde onlangs dat hij een veel grotere atoomknop heeft dan Kim
Yung-un van Noord-Korea*, waarbij hij ook nog eens toegaf te weten,
dat de raketten van Noord-Korea niet werken en dat de atoombom van
Noord-Korea ofwel niet bestaat, of dat deze nog lang niet op een raket
kan worden gemonteerd (niet klein genoeg), of zelfs dat Noord-Korea niet eens een atoombom heeft......**
Uiteraard
een uiterst infantiele manier van spreken (de mijne is groter en beter dan die
van jou), maar tevens een teken dat hij wat betreft z'n achterban
alles kan zeggen en doen, het maakt ze niet uit zolang het hun Donald
maar is...... Een houding die men vooral aantreft in dictaturen........
Daniel
Ellsberg, eertijds een legeranalist, die de klok luidde over de
leugens waarmee het volk van de VS werd meegesleept in de Vietnam
oorlog, stelt dat e.e.a. nog veel verder gaat. Met de vraag van Trump
in gedachten: "We hebben kernwapens, waarom gebruiken we ze niet?" (iets
dat hij tot 3 keer toe herhaalde), stelt Ellsberg dat Trump daarmee
een gevaarlijk punt is gepasseerd. Hij gebruikt het atoomwapen als
een pistool dat hij richt op een, in zijn ogen, 'gevaarlijke
vijand.....'
Ellsberg
is waarschijnlijk vergeten dat Obama als president in 2016 al heeft
gesteld, het atoomwapen niet langer als afschrikkingswapen te zien,
maar als een wapen dat gebruikt kan worden bij een eerste
aanval........ Ofwel bij één van de illegale oorlog de de VS keer
op keer begint........
Lees
het uitstekende artikel van Darius Shahtahmasebi hieronder, hij legt
de schuld voor de onverschilligheid bij de achterban van Trump tevens
bij de reguliere media, die deze achterban nooit serieus heeft
genomen (zoals hare kwaadaardigheid Clinton, die Trumps achterban
wegzette als een zootje niet nadenkende imbecielen....)....
Lees
en oordeel zelf:
Trump
Is a Madman Threatening Nuclear Annihilation and His Supporters Don’t
Care
January
5, 2018 at 7:49 am
(ANTIMEDIA Op-ed) — Donald
Trump’s speeches, interviews, and warmongering escapades on Twitter
are the markings of a madman. In a recent Twitter
tirade, the
president openly threatened nuclear war with North Korea, writing the
following:
“North
Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the ‘Nuclear Button is
on his desk at all times.’ Will someone from his depleted and food
starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button,
but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my
Button works!”
The
threat of nuclear war would typically send shivers down the spines of
those of us with the normal amount of empathy required to be a
well-adjusted human. According to whistleblower and former defense
analyst Daniel Ellsberg, Trump’s threats go further than mere empty
gestures. They are tantamount to actually using nukes indirectly.
As he recently stated
in an interview with Democracy
Now!:
“It’s
not a question of whether the president might use them. He’s using
them the way you use a gun when you point it at somebody in a
confrontation, whether or not you pull the trigger. And both Trump
and Kim are using their weapons in that encounter right now, as many
presidents have done…We use them on the hip.”
Why
would someone want to use the threat of nuclear annihilation that
way? Can they be trusted to operate the most powerful office in the
world?
At
the end
of December,
Donald Trump did an interview with New
York Times’
reporter Michael Schmidt, and the corporate media immediately
lambasted his comments. Trump’s nonsensical ramblings — on the
face of it — arguably portray someone who is by all accounts
mentally unfit to hold the office of the president. Whether or not
Trump is taking everyone for a ride as the master of manipulation,
the corporate media certainly holds the view that he is simply
cognitively incompetent.
“Incoherent,
authoritarian, uninformed: Trump’s New York Times interview is a
scary read,” Vox opined.
“Trump’s rambling New York Times interview reveals a mind in
denial,” wrote Vanity
Fair.
“Trump’s New York Times interview is a portrait of a man in
cognitive decline,” Esquire asserted. CNN highlighted the
“47 most outrageous lines in Donald Trump’s New York Times
interview.” The Washington
Post lamented a
lesser “11 curious quotes from Trump’s New York Times interview.”
By
all accounts, if you care about verifiable facts and integrity, it
should be evident that the president is lying through his teeth
throughout his interview with Michael Schmidt. When he isn’t lying,
he’s barely making practical sense. Yet this was a man who the
American people saw suited to take up the nuclear codes in the
presidential hot-seat with full knowledge that this was how he
presented himself on a daily basis.
This
is a man who, like a petulant child, challenged his
secretary of state to an IQ test after this official
reportedly called
the president a
“fucking moron” in response to Trump asking three times in a
meeting, “If
we have nuclear weapons, why don’t we use them?”
Despite
all of this ridiculous behavior, no matter how many times the media
explains how much Donald Trump behaves like an incoherent buffoon,
their criticisms do absolutely nothing to exact serious change on the
people who matter most: his supporters. In fact, Trump’s ludicrous
behavior is likely intentionally directed at his support base, which
seems to love every narcissistic challenge he presents to the
neoliberal establishment and its media cohorts.
As
Charles J. Sykes wrote for
the New
York Times in
February of last year, Donald Trump “understands
that attacking the media is the reddest of meat for his base, which
has been conditioned to reject reporting from news sites outside of
the conservative media ecosystem.”
This
dynamic, unfortunately, swings both ways. If Trump attacks the media,
his support base will rally behind him. Equally, if the mainstream
media attacks Trump in the manner they have become so accustomed to,
his support base stays largely immune to it. These attacks only
strengthen their diehard support for Trump. Sykes explains further:
“For
years, as a conservative radio talk show host, I played a role in
that conditioning by hammering the mainstream media for its bias and
double standards. But the price turned out to
be far higher than I imagined. The cumulative effect of the attacks
was to delegitimize those outlets and essentially destroy much of the
right’s immunity to false information. We
thought we were creating a savvier, more skeptical audience. Instead,
we opened the door for President Trump, who found an audience that
could be easily misled.” [emphasis
added]
The
effects of this paradigm go far beyond that of people being simply
misinformed and needing to attain more credible research. As Sykes
points out, it “also means that the more the fact-based
media tries to debunk the president’s falsehoods, the further it
will entrench the battle lines.”
In
other words, all of the articles attempting to criticize the New
York Times interview are completely pointless (it’s not
clear whether the media’s true aim is to change the hearts of
Trump’s core support base or simply pander to the anti-Trump crowd,
anyway). The people who read those articles and agree with them do
not require further proof that Trump is a madman; they can see it
quite clearly for themselves. The people who need convincing are
almost completely untouchable by the mainstream media, who they have
grown to completely distrust. In that context, the media is merely
preaching to the choir while the rest of us have to put up with the
potential horror of a nuclear winter simply because some Americans
love a president who is ‘strong’ and will stand up for America
(unlike that liberal Muslim commie we had a few years back, some
reason).
Sykes
explains that discrediting outlets that attack the president “helps
insulate him from criticism and it allows him to create his own
narratives, metrics and ‘alternative facts.’”
If
you don’t believe me, take a look at this tweet from
January 2, 2018, where Donald Trump stated that “[s]ince
taking office I
have been very strict on Commercial Aviation. Good news – it was
just reported that there were Zero deaths in 2017, the best and
safest year on record!”
This
is by no stretch of the imagination, completely
false,
and Donald Trump never presented any evidence that he had been strict
on commercial aviation – ever. Yet, this tweet has 83,514 likes and
15,192 retweets.
To
most of us, Donald Trump has the brain of a rambling, jealous child
who constantly takes credit for the good work done by other people
(or flat out lie instead). But to his support base, any attack on him
is automatically uncredible, and as Sykes reported, what we are now
witnessing in the age of Trump is nothing short of an “attack on
credibility itself.”
As
Sykes aptly explained:
“The
Russian dissident and chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov drew upon long
familiarity with that process when he
tweeted:
‘The point of modern propaganda isn’t only to misinform or push
an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking, to annihilate
truth.’
“Mr.
Kasparov grasps that the real threat is not merely that a large
number of Americans have become accustomed to rejecting factual
information, or even that they have become habituated to believing
hoaxes. The real danger is that, inundated with ‘alternative
facts,’ many voters will simply shrug, asking, ‘What is truth?’
— and not wait for an answer.
“In
that world, the leader becomes the only reliable source of truth; a
familiar phenomenon in an authoritarian state, but a radical
departure from the norms of a democratic society. The
battle over truth is now central to our politics.” [emphasis
added]
===========================================
* Zie: '
Trumps atoomknop is groter dan die van Kim Yung-un, bovendien werkt de VS knop wel....... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'
** Er is immers nooit nucleaire straling gemeten bovengronds, op de locatie waar de Noord-Koreanen hun 'kernproeven' uitvoeren. Dit kan de dagen na zo'n kernproef worden gemeten, zelfs middels overgaande satellieten en dat zijn er in het geval van Noord-Korea 'meer dan een paar.....' Het lijkt dan ook om een potje blufkoker van het Noord-Koreaanse regime te gaan, een regime dat dom genoeg blij is met de onmiddellijke erkenning van het hebben van een atoombom door de internationale gemeenschap...... Dom genoeg, daar als dit inderdaad zo is, de afschrikking van een aanval op Noord-Korea niet werkt en daar was het dit land tenslotte wel om te doen.......
Zie ook: '
VS sluit een nucleaire aanval niet uit als een mogelijke reactie op een 'cyberaanval.......''
en: '
VS op weg naar daadwerkelijk gebruik van het kernwapen..............' (plus 2 extra Engelstalige artikelen)
en: 'VN chef Guterrez geeft alarmcode rood af voor de wereld in 2018 en niet alleen vanwege het milieu of klimaat......'
en: 'NAVO oefent op een nucleaire aanval tegen 'een denkbeeldige vijand', ofwel Rusland..........'
