William Blum Author, Historian and Critic of US Foreign Policy

2

US Goal in Ukraine and World: Global Domination

April 7, 2014

The basic motivation and basic philosophy of US foreign policy is world domination and for the US, "world domination" means getting rid of the countries that stand in its way, says historian William Blum in an interview with the Voice of Russia. Today, there are only two countries in the world that have the military capability to confront the US: Russia and China.

This is John Robles. You are listening to an interview with Mr. William Blum, an American author, historian and a longstanding critic of US foreign policy.

Robles: Hello, sir, how are you this evening?

Blum: I’m fine, thank you.

Robles: Nice to be speaking with you again. Can you tell our listeners a little bit about your latest book? You said it is titled "America's Deadliest Export : Democracy".

Blum: Right, it is actually a collection of various writings I made over many years many of which have appeared in one form or another in my monthly internet report, the Anti-Empire Report But it is a very wide-ranging book. It deals mainly with the US foreign policy but also many other subjects including things like marijuana and abortion.

Robles: Has anyone been promoting it here?

Blum: In Russia?

Robles: Yeah.

Blum: The publishers, the entity which is behind it having been promoting.

Robles: I see. A lot of the commentators were saying you basically predicted what was going on in Ukraine. Can you give our listeners your opinion about what has been going on in Ukraine?

Blum: I don’t know what they are saying about how I predicted it, I didn't do that explicitly, but maybe they mean that given the past history of the US foreign policy, one can not fail to see the fingerprints of the US in Ukraine.

Robles: I see.

Blum: There was more than just fingerprints, we saw high officials of the State Department and the US Ambassador mingling with the people in Ukraine during the protests and handing out food to them. Why would they do that?

The US government would be very upset if during a protest in the US, there were high Russian officials mingling with the protestors and handing out food and smiling and laughing with them, it would be shocking to the media here, but for the US to do it of course it goes without any comment..

Robles: Right. I’m sure you’ve heard about the conversation between Geoffrey Pyatt and Victoria Nuland where they were basically choosing the line of the government. Is that a common practice?

Blum: Well the US had to approve the makeup of a new government when there was a coup taking place, a coup that they even planned?

On many occasions in Latin America especially over the years, coup plotters have actually gone to American embassies to speak to American officials to get their approval of the event, to make sure that the planned coup would be well-received, because if it wasn’t well-received they would not get any kind of support or aid they were hoping for following the coup. So they have to make sure beforehand that it will be improved.

Robles: Do you see the same regime change strategy that was used in other countries say South America, Central America used in Ukraine? Why do you think that will or will not work in Europe or in Ukraine in particular?

Blum: Well, it did work, the coup was successful. What do you mean it didn’t work?

Robles: I don’t think it is going to last because there is no popular support at all for the people who are in power and the people who they want to put in power there is no way they are going to be able to be elected in a democratic election.

Blum: You are probably right but only time will tell that, and I don't usually go in for predicting the future so much so we will see what happens.

Robles: For example Klitschko he made one public appearance and he was bombarded with eggs.

Blum: Are you speaking of following the coup or before the coup?

Robles: I’m talking about after the coup, I’m talking about a week and a half ago.

Blum: Well things have improved with certain aspects of the coup. They are not in love with the EU, NATO or the US as other people in Ukraine; the rightwing can be independt, I mean as nasty as they, in general they don’t like the western powers that much.

Robles: Yeah, right, right. But they were just used like... and this is a common tactic of the CIA, they would just use any group to destabilize the country.

Blum: I don’t know how the Ukrainian rightwing will allow themselves to be used too much. So only time will tell. One of their leader has been murdered by the police, that may well be a warning shot to the rest of the rightwing like: "Don’t go crazy!".

Robles: His name was Sasha Beliy. Now, these are really radical neo nazis in Ukraine. How do you think they are going to react if they find out or when they find out that they have just been used as pawns to bring about this regime change? Because Victoria Nuland and the CIA nobody is interested in them, they want to put their puppets in the government and these neo nazis were just an instrument to bring that by.

Blum: I’m sure they were aware of the possibility that they were used and they are not going to take it sitting down. Obviously they can be very, very nasty and then violent. So we shall see what happens.

Robles: What kind of reports are you getting there? I know you are watching the web and you are probably better informed than the average American is, I’m sure you are. What kind of reports are you getting about the Right Sector there in the US?

Blum: In the media there is almost no mentioning of the terms: neo nazis or fascists or extreme rightwing. That is not referred too often at all. And I’m sure an average American doesn’t realize the influences behind the coup. But again we have to see how that plays out.

They are not going to be quiet about it, they are going to want their payment in one way or another, it may be very nasty.

Robles: Yeah. What do you think the main goal was for the US in Ukraine? Was it curbing, or getting rid of Russian influence? Was it NATO bases? Was it resources? A part of the EU Agreement was handing the entire gas pipeline to EXXON oil – that was part of the EU Association Agreement. What do you think was the main motivation for taking Ukraine?

Blum: For one thing I see it as part of the overall US policy of surrounding Russia with bases and with members of NATO and with missile sites and so on.

It is part of their repertoire and Ukraine is as close as you can get to Russia. So it is a victory in that context.

The oil thing you mentioned might well be a factor as well. I haven’t really studied that in any detail. But certainly the US keeps such things in mind all the time.

Robles: So you think it was mainly a military strategic move, I mean to..?

Blum: US foreign policy is always looking.. the basic motivation and basic philosophy is world domination and you could not understand US foreign policy unless you understand that basic motivation.

And "world domination" means getting rid of those countries which stand in the way of domination. And there are only two countries in the world which have the military capability to confront and hold back part of Washington's overts: Russia and China are the only two that could confront the US.

And the US has been busy for years surrounding both of them. So this is part of that process.

Robles: What do you think about the sanctions? You are in the US you know the economic situation better than I do. Do you think that the US is in a position right now to be doing all this? And the sanctions do you think they are going to backfire? Because I mean quite frankly trade turnover with the US is so minimal that it is almost..it could just be forgotten pretty much by Russia. I mean the UK’s trade turnover is about a hundred times more, I think.

Blum: Yeah. They have already had complaints from Europe about this. It may not hold up too long, these sanctions. Although the rhetoric keeps going very strong. I mean any announcement from NATO or the EU, or the UK, or the US is always sounding tough. They are going to impose sanctions and if they need to they will impose even tougher sanctions and so on. Well, this is just a script, we have heard this before many times and it gets really very tiresome.

Robles: Yeah. Yesterday Anders Fogh Rasmussen he said: "We are going to put up all these sanctions, we are going to isolate Russia". Boom, boom, boom, blah, blah, blah..

And he says: "But, we hope that Russia continues to cooperate with us in fighting narcotics in Afghanistan", in basically "our escape route from Afghanistan." I mean they are routing NATO cargos through Russian territory.

Blum: There are all kinds of ways that Russia has been cooperating with NATO in the past decades, including with Afghanistan and with fighting terrorism and fighting piracy and all kinds of things.

That is not going to just be dropped suddenly so easily. Some people in the West are going to have to wonder about the reason behind ending such cooperation.

Robles: Yesterday NATO said they cut off all cooperation with Russia that is what they said.. But they hope that Russia would continue allowing them to do those things in Afghanistan.

Blum: Yeah, lots of luck..We will see.

Robles: You don’t think that is serious? Regarding Venezuela, we talked before about Hugo Chavez before and now they are saying that there are university students and educational institutions and... Do you know who Mr. Raul Capote is?

Blum: No.

Robles: He was a CIA collaborator in Venezuela and he came out and said that the CIA was planning to overthrow the Venezuelan Government using students in various educational institutions. Can you tell us anything about Venezuela?

Blum: The whole thing with this protest, one of the main arguments they use is that there is a shortage of certain important goods.

It reminds me very much, I lived in Chili in the 1970s under Salvadoe Allende and there was the exact same thing taking place.

There were the shortages of toilet paper and things like that and then the police and the government kept finding huge hoards of these goods in warehouses, being hoarded by the conservatives just to cause a shortage.

And a friend of mine who lives in Venezuela has just informed me that there has been a repeated discovery in Venezuela of such hiding placesfor these goods. A large amounts of them are turning up so that reminds me very much of Chili.

The protestors are not very serious about the issues that they planned to be serious about. They are part of the scheme to bring down the government or at least those behind them are that is their motivation and these phony shortages are just one tactic of what they are engaged in.

Robles: I see.

That was the end of an interview with Mr. William Blum, an American author and historian and a longstanding critic of US foreign policy. Thank you very much for listening and as always I wish you the best wherever in the world you may be.

The US Only Cares About Expanding the Empire and Israel - Part One

Download audio file   11 August, 2013 08:40 

On the surface, recent comments by the Deputy Director of the US Central Intelligence Michael Morrel seem to point to a shift in U.S. policy towards Syria and an admission to the failure of the United States in their War on Terror and against al-Qaeda and their funding, supporting and arming of extremist elements in Syria who have been fighting to overthrow the elected president of the country. Renown author and U.S. foreign policy critic William Blum characterizes U.S. policy on Syria as just a continuation of endless absurdity.

Hello, this is John Robles. I'm speaking with Mr. William Blum, he is an American author, a historian and a long-standing critic of US foreign policy.

Robles: Hello, William, how are you this evening?

Blum: Fine, thank you.

Robles: Thanks for agreeing to speak with me, appreciate it. Recently, the Deputy Director of the US Central Intelligence Agency Michael Morrel stated to the “Wall Street Journal” that Syria was a top threat to US security. Now, it's a small country on the other side of the planet. I don't think it was ever really a threat to US security. He said that there are now more foreign fighters flowing into Syria each month to take up arms with Al-Qaeda affiliated groups, I quote, then there were going to Iraq. He's also stated that the Syrian Government's weapons, if the Bashar al-Assad Government falls, will be up for grabs and up for sale by Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. What do you make of these statements? Do you think this is a change in the US position in the country?

Blum: Well, certainly a change in public to admit that they've been supporting all these Al Qaeda types for a long time. That's quite an admission, quite a change. Will this have any effect on the US foreign policy remains to be seen, but if the past is any indication we can’t expect too much change.

The US is committed to overthrowing Assad because of Israel. That's the main motivation for the US. Israel doesn't want Assad to be there and that is not going to change. It just makes their position more absurd than before.

The US's foreign policy is a continuous piece of absurdity, and to get it even more absurd at times like now.

They've been supporting these terrible people in Syria for a couple of years now and now all of a sudden one of their officials wakes up and says: “Hey, these are really bad guys we've been supporting, maybe, we should stop doing that?” It's almost comical.

Robles: Yeah, if there weren't so many people dying, it would be laughable, I think. So, they seem to have flipped the switch or switched the flip, but in an absence of a statement saying they would support the government of Bashar al-Assad, if they are going to be against Assad and they are going to be against the insurgents, what kind of a scenario could that possibly bring about?

Blum: They may just stop giving any kind of support to the insurgents. They have given them all kinds of intelligence support and so-called non-lethal military support. Probably more than that but that is what they have admitted to, but they gave them arms as well. So, they gave them all this support. In such a case, it was difficult for Assad's government to be victorious. And, Israel may pick up the slack and invade Syria, I wouldn’t put it past them.

Robles: Do you think Israel is the one behind all this, pushing for Bashar Assad's demise?

Blum: In fact, Israel is certainly the root here if Israel was not a factor the US would not be fighting in Syria they would not have been fighting in Iraq and they would have to be threatening Iran the way they are. Israel is the important key in each of these battles. So they may do more in Syria than they have been doing.

Robles: I came to my own conclusion, if I may... it seems to me that this new flip of the switch which Israeli just... much of a switch... is just another reason for an armed, if you want to call it, “intervention” into Syria. I mean, O.K., they wanna get rid of Assad, to get chemical weapons, that didn't seem to work, and now, they can say: well, if Assad falls, these terrorists are getting all these weapons. They might have to go in and invade and kill everybody, without statements of support for Assad. What do you think of that?

Blum: I can see logic in what you are saying. I can see the US government doing that. But then, what will happen? If they interfere in force, who would they actually be shooting at? It's not clear what the repercussions of this statement would be.

Would they fight against the so-called insurgents, the jihadists – or will they fight against the government? It's an absurd situation, and I cannot predict what's going to happen.

Robles: Do you think that they are going to fight against everybody and just wipe everybody out?

Blum: I'm sure there are people in the US establishment who would like to see that, yes. They are crazy and evil enough to want to kill them all. That is the name of a new book in the US about Iraq, it's called “Kill Them All”!

Robles: That's interesting. There are those in US policy establishment who would promote an idea of just wiping everybody out if they could?

Blum: When Iran and Iraq fought against each other in the 1980s, the expressed wish of some leading American politicians like Henry Kissinger was “give aid to both sides and let them kill as many of each other as they can”. That was expressed by Kissinger and probably somebody else at the time. They did give more aid to Iraq than to Iran, but still, they were not above saying that they hoped that both sides would maximize death and destruction as much as possible.

Robles: That's a very interesting point you've raised, because it has seemed to me – well, I'm sure that its clear to everybody – that they have promoted and stoked sectarian violence between Sunni and Shias, but in reality, I think, the US does not support either group. Would you agree with that?

Blum: The US supports only one group – and that's the United States. Maybe, Israel but that is the other side of the same coin. There is the only reason – expanding the American empire. And, the US is not anti-Islam as you often hear people saying on the left and on the right that it's anti-Islam. It's not anti-Islam. What they've been doing in recent years in the Middle East – they've wiped out the three leading secular societies in the Middle East.

Robles: Right, right, right. Unbelievable!

Blum: In Iraq, then, Libya, and, then, Syria. The public says good we are fighting Islam we are fighting these terrorists but to the powers that be in Washington there is no such thing. They just want to expand the empire and to protect Israel, and that's all that counts.

Robles: Very, very good point, Bill, because in Syria, there were Orthodox Christians, there were Coptic Christians, there were hundreds of different ethnic groups, all living peacefully side by side, the same thing in Iraq, I mean, Sunnis and Shias... Sunni women were marrying Shia men, marrying and living together side by side before the invasion. Now I've heard that many Shia in Iraq wake up with a pot of blood on the doorstep, left by Sunnis stirring them to leave. And there is no more intermarriage.

Blum: Right. The same thing in Libya, any coexistence between various sects has been wiped out by the revolution, and the jihadists have a great influence in the new government.

Obama is as Spineless as They Come - Part Two

Download audio file   14 August, 06:19

The mission of most normal intelligence agencies is to provide the leadership of a country with vital information that they need to formulate and implement policy, protect the country and deal with enemies and allies alike. The seeming reversal which exists today in the United States, as the military industrial complex has taken over the country, where intelligence is created to give a reason or pretext for war and aggression is an alarming trend. Renown author William Blum adds his voice to a growing course fed up with war crimes, illegality, spying, a war on whistleblowers and a president, Barack Obama, who lied his way into the White House and lacks the moral fortitude to bring about accountability and rule of law.

Robles: We’ve had a lot of talk regarding the cancellation by Barack Obama of talks with President Putin here, in Moscow, in September. I’ve just got a report that talks were not cancelled they were postponed. A lot of this has to do with Syria, but mainly it has to do with Edward Snowden. Why such a huge, it seems, unbalanced reaction towards this one individual, in your opinion?

Blum: Because the US Congress and the US media are full of crazies they are fully accustomed to being on top of the world. Anybody who stands up to them, as Snowden has, or Bradley Manning, they simply lose their cool completely. They cannot take such opposition.

They are so unaccustomed to being opposed by anyone of any influence that it immediately bends them out of shape and so Snowden has and Manning and Julianne Assange. those three guys have really stood up to the Empire and the Empire cannot take that. You hear the expression “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”. OK. I would add “Hell hath no fury like an Empire embarrassed”.

Robles: Very good, Bill.

Blum: And the revelations by Manning really embarrassed the Empire.

Robles: It just seems like ridiculous, especially since it was the US’s own idiocy that led Snowden get away in the first place and, you know, left him stranded in Moscow. If they hadn’t revoked his passport, he would have just moved on.

Blum: Yes but by then in Washington they had no choice. Such a man had to be punished as a warning to anyone who wants to act like him. They have to get very tough to make it clear to every possible future whistleblower, that is what I would call it.

They refuse to use that word because it’s an acceptable word, a whistleblower, so they refuse to call him a whistleblower and they call him by traitor.

Robles: I’ve got some hate mail today. It was really interesting by somebody in the United States. He said that Snowden was a traitor and he was US property and he needs to be handed back.

Blum: Par for the course.

Robles: Can I ask you a question now about the CIA. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe, you’re an older hand than I am and you remember further back than I do I’m sure. And you’ve been in the game much longer than I have.

It seemed to me that the USA, they CIA, they used to provide intelligence and then policy was formulated, right. So, for example, the CIA says “Oh, this country A has moved a nuclear bomb to country D”, right? So the government makes a policy okay: “We have to go for the country A” or something like that.

Now it seems that the CIA is formulating intelligence in order to back up policy. I see they want an invasion of Syria, the CIA is going to create the intelligence for it, and they wanted an invasion of Iraq, the CIA created yellow cake and all this other stuff. What do you think about that?

Blum: Your point is well taken but it’s not entirely that way. The CIA, during its heyday in the 50s and 60s and 710s. I could find examples of them in effect making policy. Subtlety now maybe it’s more open. But it’s not entirely new that the agency would attempt to make policy.

You see in those days the CIA had the whole power to do such things and now there is also the NSA and the Homeland Security and the Defense Department which has its own intelligence agencies. There are more players in the game so the CIA doesn’t have as much power as it used to have.

Robles: Ok, who would you say is controlling the US government now: the military industrial complex, or the “war department” or the Defense Department? Who is calling the shot?

Blum: I don’t usually think in such terms. The defense corporations which are actually war corporations, they have a lot of influence they make a lot of money out of war and their people, executives with these corporations go the government in high positions and when they leave the government they go back to the corporations.

The revolving door between these two institutions. They have a lot of chances to influence matters.

I think the president if had any backbone could counter much of these things we’re talking about, but Obama has no backbone. He is as spineless as they come. and he has taken out the presidency from this equation.

So we are left with the Defense Department and the CIA and the NSA and so on. Obama doesn’t really care, it’s not that he wanted to do something but he didn’t have the nerve, he doesn’t care. I’ve said this about him since he took office and even when he was a candidate. The man has no strong beliefs except to be president of the United States. That is all that he cares about. There is nothing overridingly important to him.

Robles: Yes, you’ve said that before. And I think the more of him we see the more that your words are becoming unarguably correct. I agree with you 100%. But he was very careful in making all his promises about change and everything else. So…

Blum: Yes, people called him Mr. Hopey-Changey.

Robles: Mr. Hopey-Changey?

Blum: Yes. Those were the two leading points of his platform: Hope and Change.

Robles: And now he is Mr. Hopey-Changey. Ok. I like that, Bill. I appreciate that.

On Syria: do you see an expansion of the front there or do you think maybe the US government is just trying to find a way to back out off the whole conflict or… Do you think that is a possibility?

Blum: In light of the statement of today which you quoted from the CIA official I really can’t predict. I seldom engage in predicitions I prefer to analyze what have already taken place.

Robles: Yes. OK. You’re more of a historian than a fortuneteller if you will. Okay.

Blum: Have a nice weekend!

Robles: Okay you too! You have a wonderful weekend and thanks a lot.

Blum: You’re welcome. Bye bye.

That was an interview with Mr. William Blum, an American author and historian and a long-standing critic of US foreign policy. Thank you very much for listening and as always I wish you all the best wherever you may be. Stay with us.

C

 

25 June, 13:53  

Snowden would be better off in Cuba, chance of coup d'état is much less than elsewhere - Blum

Photo: AFP

Download audio file

Speaking about the latest Edward Snowden’s travel ‘plans’ and the confusion the world has been exposed to in the media on the subject of his whereabouts, Mr. William Blum, an American author, historian and a longstanding critic of US foreign policy and an outer of CIA agents, claims that Cuba would be Snowden’s best bet, as it’s “the most guaranteed place not to buckle to any kind of American pressure” and “the chance of coup d'état is much less than elsewhere”. He also thinks the American whistleblower allegedly chose Ecuador “because of their record with Julian Assange” and says the Russians are purposefully prpogating confusion in the media to make it difficult for the CIA to capture or assassinate the NSA leaker.

http://m.ruvr.ru/2013/06/25/10/BillBlum2013.jpg

William Blum

Robles: I’d really like to get your opinion on the whole Snowden affair, since this is something I think you are pretty close to, as far as the whistleblowing. What do you make of the whole situation? And what do you think his chances are of making it to Ecuador, and why Ecuador?

Blum:He’s a very brave man. I hope he makes it somewhere. I think that Cuba would be his best bet, as Cuba is the place most guaranteed not to buckle to any kind of American pressure. Where he is now, I have no idea. I think all the confusion that we’ve been exposed to in the media is not by chance. I think the Russians are purposely doing this to make it difficult for the CIA to capture and/or assassinate Snowden, which in fact they would love to do. That’s all I know about it.

Robles: You know a lot about South American countries, and Latin American countries and the instability in a lot of those countries. Why would he go to Ecuador, I mean it is a small country? I’m sure the knowledge he has, I don’t see what real huge use it would have to Ecuadorian intelligence.

Blum:His knowledge concerning who was being spied upon by the U.S. Government I don’t think wouldbe of much value to any foreign nation. I don’t think that’s the issue.

I think he chose Ecuador because of their record with Julian Assange. They have proven themselves to be a capable protector of someone like him. And so, that’s probably maybe the only reason he’d chosen Ecuador. Of course the President, Correa, is a leftist and the people under him in the high positions are also leftist, so that’s a protection.

Robles: You know as well as I know Latin American countries they can be very volatile. What if Correa is voted out of office next time and some right-wing president comes in?

Blum:Correa was re-elected as president within the past six months I think.

Robles: Yes, he was.

Blum:So, he stays for a few years. Although, I would not put it past the CIA instigating a coup; they tried in the past to do the same. But now they may be more serious about it, andthey could certainly pour their heart and soul into it, and use all their assets and all their wealth, and their wealth is their main asset and they can buy almost anything and anyone. So, that’s the reason I think Snowden would be better off in Cuba, the chance of coup d'état is much less there than elsewhere.

Robles: Yeah, sure, sure, I mean they’ve been trying, what was it 600 and … more than 650 …?

Blum:Oh yeah, they’ve been trying to assassinate Castro 600 times or so, but they haven’t succeeded, and they won’t (unintelligible).

Robles: Why didn’t he stay in Russia, I mean there is a very little chance that Russia would buckle to U.S.?

Blum:Russia does not want to have all these headaches that might entail,and keep in mind, this is not quite the Cold War. Russia is not a Communist country, it’s not at war ideologically with the US. It’s at war on a different level. The US has surrounded Russia with military bases. It’s incorporated many of the former Soviet leading republics into NATO; all of them are not far from Russia.

So, the US is really threatening Russia and Russia has reason to be hostile towards the U.S., not as much as during the Cold War, but enough. They could have kept Snowden there. I don’t know. He may even still be there, for all we know he’s still there, for all we know he may be there. Who knows?

Robles: I think if Russia made a decision to give him asylum, and Russian officials have said he would have been granted it had he requested it, I’m sure Russia would be in much more of a position to protect him. It’s not that easy for the CIA to operate here and manipulate politicians and everything as it is I think in many Latin American countries - same thing for China. First, I thought maybe he went from Hong Kong into mainland China, but apparently not.

Blum:The point is well taken. I don’t know what’s going to happen. He could wind up in Russia or in Ecuador, or Cuba, or Venezuela. But he is not going to wind up in California, I’m sure of that.

Robles: What do you think the CIA’s going to try to do, or the NSA’s going to try to do to get him back? How far do think they’re going to go?

Blum:Physically get him back?

Robles: Or get rid of him.

Blum:It depends on how many opportunities they have. The Russians and the other countries we’ve mentioned have to be super careful to avoid giving the CIA any special opportunity, which probably is why we have all this confusion. This is some kind of master plan.

Robles: Once he gets to Ecuador, if that’s where he’s going, what do you think is going to happen?

Blum:It’s hard to imagine him living a peaceful life there. He will always be looking over his shoulder. The CIA can have 1000 assassins on the loosewith a large reward. I cannot see him having a peaceful, stable life there. But he must have thought of all this in advance, I hope he has a master plan.

Robles: Well, I think he was very clever in getting out of their clutches and getting to Hong Kong. That was actually a pretty wise move, because he was able to get there without a visa or anything. Which, I guess he fell off the grid for a while. What’s your opinion of the revelations that he’s made? How do you see his case in contrast to an average espionage case?

Blum:Compared to WikiLeaks, it’s not quite as dramatic as WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks exposed all kinds of very, very embarrassing things concerning US foreign policy. Snowden’s revelationsare embarrassing,it’s just it’sone big embarrassment, it’s not 100 different small embarrassments. It’s just the embarrassment of they were spying even more than what people thought. I’ll tell you many people who assumed that NSA was covering everyone, so even those people would not be surprised. In any event, to me, it’s not quite as embarrassing to US foreign policy as the WikiLeaks revelations were.

Robles: To the world’s public though, I mean I’ve always had the suspicion and I think you have, and any thinking person on the Internet has had the suspicion that they’re being watched or something. But this is right in our face now – we are all being watched, we are all being spied on, they are into absolutely everything. Do you personally feel uncomfortable getting online anymore? What effect do you think this is going to have on the Internet?

Blum:I was always careful about what I said online and in emails. That’s not going to change… well,maybe I’ll be a bit more cautiousness than usual, but not much. So, to me it is not going to be a big change.

You can find part 2 of this interview on our website at english.ruvr.ru

  

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_06_25/Snowden-would-be-better-off-in-Cuba-chance-of-coup-d-tat-is-much-less-than-elsewhere-Blum-John-Robles-2815/

 

28 June, 11:11  

Snowden is a whistleblower and a hero – William Blum

Photo: Reuters

Download audio file

Snowden’s revelations are just one embarrassment for the U.S. unlike the 100s of WikiLeaks revelations. According to William Blum it would not be surprising if the Obama administration attempts to go after Glenn Greenwald for his role in exposing the NSA’s PRISM program. Despite all of the noise about PRISM and Snowden, Mr. Blum is convinced that nothing at all will change.

Part 1 of the interview

Robles: What’s your opinion of the revelations that he’s made? And how do you see his case in contrast to an average espionage case?

Blum: Compared to WikiLeaks, it is not quite as dramatic as WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks exposed all kinds of very-very embarrassing things concerning U.S. foreign policy.

Snowden revelation is just one big embarrassment, it is not 100 different small embarrassments. It is just the embarrassment that they are spying even more than most people thought.

I’ve seen many people who assumed that the NSA was spying on everyone, those people would not be surprised. To me, it was not quite as embarrassing to U.S. foreign policy as the WikiLeaks revelations were.

Robles: To the world’s public though, I mean I have always had this suspicion and I think you had, and any thinking person on the Internet has had this suspicion that they are being watched. But this is right in our face now: we are all being watched, we are all being spied on, they are into absolutely everything. Do you personally feel uncomfortable getting online anymore? What effect do you think this is going to have on the Internet?

Blum: I was always careful about what I said online and in e-mails. That’s not going to change… well, I may be more cautious than usual, but not too much. So, to me it is not going to be a big change.

Robles: What about other people? I mean most people think they watch terrorists or something, they are not watching me, I’m just Joe Blow from Des Moines Iowa. But they are actually watching everybody.

Blum: Anybody is a subject to being watched at any moment and for any reason. It is too much even for the US Government to read each e-mail every day as they appear. But what they are doing is saving up all this information, meta data they call it, and when any individual comes into their focus on any reason, then they have all the files they can turn to on him and then read them. But they can’t read them as they come each day, that would be too much even for the U.S. Government.

Robles: That doesn’t ease my mind at all, anyway. Back to Snowden, would you say he, in your opinion, is a hero, is he a whistleblower, is he a spy?

Blum: He is the whistleblower and a hero, I think. He really put his life on the line now. Whatever life he had before, that is over forever. He is very brave, or unless he is somewhat suicidal, I don’t know. But it certainly was a brave act and he’s chosen as his foes the toughest bastards in the world.

Robles: Yes, I mean, they are even worse than the CIA.

Blum: It is all one big happy family; the CIA, the NSA, the FBI, they are all combined against this one individual, and the American media at the same time. The American media they’re just playing their usual subservient role. Leading correspondents on TV were attacking Glenn Greenwald yesterday. That’s a sign of what is going to happen.

Robles: What exactly are they saying in the media and what’s the American reaction to Snowden?

Blum: This guy, one of the leading reporters, interviewing Greenwald said; “Is there any reason why you shouldn’t be arrested for what you’ve done?”

Robles: Greenwald should be arrested?

Blum: Yes, that’s what he said. Greenwald should be arrested. That’s the kind of thing we can expect to happen. But no one has mentioned the former Washington Post reporter, Barton Gellman I think his name is, who was also involved in this story along with Greenwald. They didn’t mention him because he is from Washington Post, he is on left. Greenwald has made it very clear that he is on the left, so that’s why he is the subject of such attacks.

Robles: So, do you think Greenwald is going to have problems?

Blum: I don’t know what is going to happen. We’ll have to wait and see.

Robles: Do you think that it is possible that they could try to prosecute Greenwald for this?

Blum: Well, yes, I wouldn’t put anything past them. They could prosecute you and I for this interview I wouldn’t rule out anything.

Robles: I don’t want to make a joke out of this, but do you think it is possible the Ecuadorian Embassy could have another permanent resident?

Blum: But how would Snowden get to London?

Robles: No, I mean Greenwald.

Blum: Greenwald! Oh, I don’t think that will happen. He himself is a constitutional lawyer. I think he would love fighting this in court, not while he was in prison like Bradley Manning, and that might be the case. Greenwald lives in Brazil and I think he might be able to get sanctuary there.

Robles: Is this going to affect the NSA in any way or is this going to affect the US policy in any way?

Blum: That can make them all feel so guilty that they are going to change all their policies. They will stop attacking people and stop bombing people, and stop overthrowing governments because they are so embarrassed. Yes! NOT!

Robles: Is there going to be any backlash against Microsoft and Skype etc?

Blum: No, the consumers’ love their toys, they can’t do without them. Nothing will change there.

Robles: You don’t think anything will change. Do you think this is kind of part of a plan? I mean I see this now, people are so dependent on their devices, people are so dependent on the Internet, people are so dependent on their computers and all their electronics. Do you think this was part of a larger plan to get people dependent and then start watching them, and then let them know they are being watched so they are kind of controlling themselves?

Blum: That’s a bit conspiracy minded to my taste. It is a bit too grandiose. So, for the moment I would say I partly don’t know and partly my answer is “no”.

Robles: Okay, that’s my own conspiracy idea, but that’s okay. People are saying this is going to spark a wave of other whistleblowers. Do you see that coming out?

Blum: We’ve had quite a few in the past few years under Obama. Snowden makes I think the 7th person that they have brought charges against, the 7th whistleblower, which is more than in the entire history of the US. In all the previous administrations there have been two of three, and now there have been seven under Obama.

Robles: Is this problem because of the illegality of the Obama Administration is outdoing all previous administrations or is this because they are being more strict than other administrations on whistleblowers?

Blum: I can’t say. Obama anyway is not what he was thought to be.

Robles: Thanks a lot Bill, I really appreciate it.

This is John Robles, you were listening to an interview with Mr. William Blum, an American author, historian and a longstanding critic of US foreign policy.

http://cdn.ruvr.ru/2011/12/19/1244631153/Robles_5.JPG.30x30x1.jpgJohn Robles
Read more: 
http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_06_28/Snowden-is-a-whistleblower-and-a-hero-William-Blum-5237/

 

 

29 May, 17:52  

Anti-American terrorism no mystery. U.S. Gov does not mean well - Blum

бостон взрыв бостон марафон цветы память жертвам

© Photo "The Voice of Russia"

Download audio file

There all always conspiracies regarding violent events and the Boston Marathon bombing is not different but proof must be solid, said William Blum in an interview with the Voice of Russia. Anti-American terrorism is not just a Muslim phenomenon, it is the result of U.S. “intervention” all over the world and is in no way a mystery. This is obvious, but people want to believe the U.S. Government means well, even when the fact that they do not is right in front of them. Mr. Blum spoke on these matters and more in this interview.

William Blum

William Blum

This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Mr. William Blum. He is an American author, historian and a critic of United States foreign policy. He is also the manager, editor and owner of killinghope.org

Robles: Hello Mr. Blum! How are you this evening?

Blum: Fine, thank you.

Robles: This is a unique book for Russia.

Blum: Well, it’s a Russian language version of my book, which in English is called “Killing Hope”, in Russian I think it is called “Killing Democracy”.

It is a very detailed list of American interventions all over the world; all the invasions and bombings, and overthrowing governments, and assassinations and so on.

It is the only book of its kind, as far as I know, which has gone into great detail about each of these interventions.

Robles: How many of your books have been translated into other languages?

Blum: I have more than 30 foreign language editions of my books. My book “Rogue State” has very close to 10 languages. But the total of my foreign language editions is at least 30 now.

Robles: You had one book, I believe, quoted by Osama Bin Laden?

Blum: Yes, that was “Rogue State”. In 2006 I think it was. In one of his audio recordings, he spoke to the American people and told them if they wanted to understand what motivates he and his people, they should read my book “Rogue State”.

And I sold about 20 000 copies because of that. But I lost more money because I lost speaking engagements. University campuses, university officials didn’t want to have their school associated with somebody who has been recommended by Osama Bin Laden. And my paid speaking engagements in campuses fell from, about, close to 10 a year, to almost nothing.

Robles: Did that come back up? Did it bounce back?

Blum: No, I’m still almost never invited to speak. Not by universities, it is only by some other private group or individual.

Robles: What are your views on the Boston bombing?

Blum: The surviving brother said that he and his brother were motivated by anger at U.S. actions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This has been stated by many anti-American terrorists over the past 20 years or so, I’ve written about this.

There is a whole list of terrorist actions which explicitly blame US foreign policy. That’s a very important point which I try to emphasize. We shouldn’t think of this anti-American terrorism as a big mystery, we know why it takes place.

Robles: You are in the U.S. Have you heard anything about photographs on the Internet saying that the Boston bombing was a false flag terrorist attack?

Blum: You find that claim following every terrorist action. I’m personally beleaguered by all these conspiracy people for not following in their footsteps.

I am not opposed to the idea of conspiracy. There are many and have been many conspiracies carried out in the US. But that doesn’t mean I have to look for that in every violent action.

Robles: Have you seen the photographs and some of what they are calling the “evidence”? The guy in the wheelchair who is actually already a double amputee and stuff? Have you seen any of that?

Blum: I’ve had a few emails about, supposedly, there was a photo or a video of the older brother captured by the police and he is shown naked, or almost naked, and then his death was announced. So, they wonder what happened; that he was captured, he wasn’t shot. So, how did he wind up being shot to death. It is a valid question.

Robles: There is a lot of suspicion about: okay… he was killed, his brother was rendered mute, their friend was killed in Orlando Florida after midnight questioning in his home, two FBI agents were killed falling out of a helicopter that were involved in the Boston investigation, as a great author and mind, what do you think about all that?

Blum: (Laughs) Those things are always very intriguing. There are not too many cases, if any, of the FBI murdering its own people.

Robles: What if it was somebody else in the Government? They are talking about Navy Seal teams or something like this.

Blum: I would have to be shown very good proof.

Robles: Are there going to be any changes in U.S. Government policy because of this?

Blum: I don’t know. I can predict: as long as the U.S. keeps intervening all over the world and doing these terrible things, anti-American acts of terrorism will continue.

Robles: Do you think there is going to be many more attacks in the next 10 or 15 years from people, or, “Muslim people” who’ve come of age since 9-11?

Blum: Listen, now this applies to all other people in parts of Latin America. From the 1950s, to the 1980s, the U.S. intervened in Latin America on many-many occasions in bloody ways.

What was the result? Many anti-American acts of terrorism in Latin America. Many, many attacks against these American targets. So, it is the same thing all over the world. It is not just a Muslim phenomenon. People don’t like being invaded and bombed, and overthrown, and tortured. It is that simple.

Robles: You just mentioned torture, it brought to mind Guantanamo. Do you have any opinion, or anything, about the hunger strike that’s going on there?

Blum: Those people are very desperate. Many of them had been cleared to leave years ago and they are still there. Any human being would find that totally intolerable.

Years and years of being locked up under horrible conditions without being charged with a crime, without being found guilty even. Who can blame them for being so desperate.

Their hunger campaign is an act of desperation. I hope, for their sake, that they are finally released and back to their home countries.

Robles: Do you think Obama is going to release them?

Blum: Obama has no backbone whatsoever. You can’t count on him to do the right thing ever. It depends on how the winds are blowing, the “political” and “public relations” winds, that is all he cares about. The man has no basic core beliefs.

Robles: What’s your opinion on his Nobel Peace Prize?

Blum: What do you think it is?

That “prize” should be abolished. And it is not just because of Obama, Henry Kissinger and Menachem Begin, and a bunch of other people have gotten that prize. Total war-mongers and war-lovers and mass-murderers have gotten the Peace Prize! What is the point of that?

Robles: Yes, I agree with you 1,000%.

Blum: Give it to Bradley Manning!

Robles: Yeah! Give it to you even!

Blum: Even me, I would accept the money, although, in my acceptance speech I would not hold back my views. I would say: “I’m taking the money because I want to give it all to anti-war organizations.”

Robles: That’s wonderful! Hey Bill, it was a pleasure speaking with you. Anything that you want to finish up with?

Blum: Yes, my usual standard message is that: “Do not believe that the U.S. Government and its foreign policy, means well. It doesn’t!” And that is the main barrier to people like me in convincing other Americans to oppose American policies. They have this basic belief that the U.S. Government “means well” and that is very tough to get around.

Robles: And people do want to hear it.

Blum: They don’t want to believe it, yes.

Robles: They don’t want to believe it. Even if it is right in their face, right?

Blum: Yes, it is painful.

Robles: Bill, thank you very much. I really appreciate you speaking with me.

Blum: Thank you, John. Can I mention my website. It is williamblum.org

This is John Robles, you were listening to an interview with Mr. William Blum, an American author, historian and a longstanding critic of US foreign policy.

Official website of the author, historian, and U.S. foreign policy critic William Blum

The CIA has attempted to assassinate 50 foreign leaders including Chavez – William Blum

The CIA has attempted to assassinate 50 foreign leaders including Chavez – William Blum

14 March, 10:53     Download audio file

The late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez was warned by Fidel Castro to be careful of a very specific attack, namely a quick jab from an infected needle. Such a warning coming from a leader who has reportedly been the target of CIA assassination plots more than 600 times in over 50 years, was sure to be heeded. Was the illness of Hugo Chavez a completely deniable assassination by the CIA? William Blum spoke with the VOR’s John Robles and discussed this issue and more.

Robles: I’ve read your Anti-Empire report regarding Hugo Chavez. Can you give us your comments on speculation that he was assassinated by the CIA?

Blum: I cannot prove it of course, but I believe he was. It would be totally in keeping with the entire history of the CIA and its attitude towards people like Hugo Chavez.

The CIA has attempted to assassinate more than 50 foreign leaders and successfully at least half the time. And very few of them were as despised by the US Government as Chavez was, I would say. So, there would be no reason at all to expect that the CIA would not at least plan on killing, and the nature of his ailment is very odd.

He went from a cancer, which would not go away despite several sessions of chemotherapy and what have you. Then it went to serious lung infections, which would not go away no matter what they did. And then it went to a massive heart attack. All in the same man with no apparent cause, he was only 58 years old, and as far as we know he was a very healthy until this happened, it is all very odd.

And given the great motivation that the US Government and the persons in the CIA has put for killing a man like Hugo Chavez, I’m pretty sure that the CIA played a role in this.

Robles: Do you know are have you heard of any credible new technology or new programs that could deliver such a cancer?

Blum: The means would be a needle with a quick sharp jab and what you need is getting one person close enough to Chavez to do that.

Chavez was always in the public eye, he was always embracing people. There must have been countless occasions in the past few years when he was vulnerable to a quick jab by a needle that would be the method of transmitting the ailments.

Robles: Did he ever complain that he had been poked by something in public? Were there any reports of anything like that happening that you had heard about?

Blum: He did mention that Fidel Castro warned him about just that. He said: “A quick jab with a needle, and they’ll do… I don’t know what!” Actually he was told by Fidel.

Robles: A quick jab with a needle. Do you think that happened with Fidel because he had become very ill?

Blum: Well, Fidel… According to Cuban intelligence, there were more than 600 attempts on the life of Fidel Castro by the CIA. There is an entire book on that subject by Cuban Intelligence.

And many of the methods were pretty bizarre, including an exploding cigar, but over the course of 50 years the Cubans claim there were more than 600 attempts on his life and it may have taken just one with Chavez.

Robles: Have you heard anything from your sources or from where you get some of your information? Have you heard anything detailing any connection between these two US Air Force Attaches that were expelled from the country and the death of Hugo Chavez?

Blum: No. I would assume that there is a connection but I don’t know if the Venezuelan Government has actually said so.

Getting back to Chavez’s case,we have to keep in mind that four other South American leaders, prominent people on the left, all came down with cancer within the past year or two.

Robles: I think it was seven, wasn’t it, altogether?

Blum: The four that I named in my report… You can add the ones that you know just for my information… were Cristina Fernandez…

Robles: … De Kirchner, right…

Blum: of Argentina, Dilma Rousseff of Brazil, Fernando Lugo of Paraguay, the former Brazilian head of state Lula da Silva. Who would you add into that list?

Robles: Well, and then of course Hugo Chavez himself…

Blum: Castro is one of them…

Robles: I would add Castro to the list and Kirchner’s husband who died of a mysterious heart attack as well.

Blum: Right!

Robles: We might add that as a mysterious illness, not exactly a cancer but…

Blum: Right! If the CIA was involved it doesn’t have to be cancer necessarily of course.

Robles: Oh, sure, it could be anything! Have you heard anything about cancer strains or any kind of killing weapons like this, any kind of biological weapons that would give maybe cancer-like symptoms, not exactly a certain type of cancer?

Blum: I very well may have read of such over the years, I have read so much about the CIA, but at the moment I can’t think of anything to supply you with that information. Although we do know, it is well known, that for decades the CIA was looking for a method of killing somebody which would not leave a trace. The CIA itself has used those words. For the entire period of the Cold War that was a major stated project of the CIA. But where that stands today, I have no idea.

Robles: Yes, of course that is all very secret and no one is going to talk about it, but perhaps there are some echoes or some whispers? Maybe somebody has come out and said something? What other reasons would you give to back up the argument that he was assassinated?

Blum: I will mention there is no one in the entire universe who was more hated, no leader, more hated than Chavez was by the US Government. In the eyes of the US power that be, Chavez was worse than Fidel Castro and Salvador Allende.

Robles: Why was he so hated?

Blum: Because he was the most outspoken leader in the world when it came to criticizing the US foreign policy. He never pulled his punches for a moment, he made a claim that it was all crimes against humanity and the US leaders were war criminals, and he said so explicitly. It is unusual for a head of state to be talking that way. And at the UN he attacked Bush in front of the whole world.

Robles: Oh yes, I remember he said that the Devil had been there the day before or something, and it still smelled like sulfur.

Blum: Yes, Bush had spoken to the UN before Chavez from the same platform. And Chavez said there was a smell of sulfur in the air because of that.

Robles: That’s usually the domain of the United States, I mean… Isn’t it? I mean Bush was calling everybody the axis of evil, and all this stuff, branding everyone evil. Wasn’t that kind of a shock to see the same thing done to an American leader?

Blum: Yeah, it is a shock for anyone under any circumstances to be so outspoken in the criticism of the US foreign policy. It is a point in Chavez’s favor that he could have the honesty and the courage to say such things, which very much needed to be said.

Robles: So, you supported the way he stood up?

Blum: Well, in general yes. I think there certainly were times when he may have overdone it, even for me. I mean, he felt obliged to comment on everything under the sun, and I thought several times that he could have held off on saying certain things, they were not serving any good purpose. But that’s a minor criticism of his overall marvelous record.

Robles: You say he had a marvelous record. What do you think were his major achievements in your opinion?

Blum: What he’s brought to the poor people of Venezuela in the way of education and healthcare, and housing, and what have you. And what he brought to the rest of the South America, he formed various anti-US empire blocs which stood in the way of expansion of the US influence.

He and others formed a new… A counter to the OAS, the Organization of American States, which for decades has been dominated and corrupted by the US and Canada. And they formed a new organization in South America excluding the US and Canada. So it was that simple.

Robles: Do you think his achievements will continue or do you think the US will be successful in rolling back everything he did? Which of course I assume they would want to.

Blum: Yes, they would want to. But if Maduro who was chosen and backed by Chavez, wins, and he is expected to win in the election next month, then most of it will continue, I assume.

‘There is a drone with Assange’s name on it’ – William Blum

28 January, 12:27  

‘There is a drone with Assange’s name on it’ – William Blum

Assange will be assassinated if freed, expert says. In an exclusive interview with the Voice of Russia, William Blum, an American author, historian, and critic of United States foreign policy spoke about CIA assassinations (one of his areas of expertise) and some of his past work. Mr. Blum is candid in his assessment of CIA assassination plots against such people as Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa. He also has some surprising things to say about Julian Assange and Osama Bin Laden.

Robles: Hello Mr. Blum,nice to be speaking with you.You have a very long and interesting history… a lot of things you have written. You wrote a book about the CIA. Can you tell us a little bit about that?

Blum:Well, American interventions carried out via the CIA and all the U.S. military have been my specialty for many-many years. My books emphasize those things. As does my monthly newsletters “The Anti-Empire Report”.

As far as the backlash: the U.S. government doesn’t bother American authors that much, because they know we don’t have that much influence, they can afford to have us write things and point to that as proof of freedom of speech in America. So they don’t care.

Robles: I see. They said that you had exposed more than 200 CIA employees.

Blum:That was in 1969 when I was working for the “Underground Press” in Washington D.C. and I and a colleague we parked our car outside the CIA headquarters in Virginia and for a couple of hours or so, we recorded the license plate numbers of all the cars going into the CIA. And with that information we were able to compile a list of names and addresses of these people, which we published in our underground newspaper.

Robles: That sounds very interesting! You talked about CIA assassination plots, you’re pretty much an expert on that. Can you tell us a little bit about what you know about the plot to remove Hugo Chavez?

Blum:Assassination attempts? That was in 2004, the U.S. government met with the coup plotters both in Venezuela and Washington and these people then carried out a military coup which overthrew Chavez and the people took him to custody, but he was freed after about two days, because of a combination of public outcry and pressure from the remaining members of the military who were not part of the coup. So then he actually had and still has a lot of support in the military. He, himself was a member of it. So a combination of the military and a public outcry forced the coup plotters to abandon their plans and after two days Chavez was released.

Robles: Can you tell us about your book “Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower”? And could you comment on an endorsement you received, at the time, in 2006 by Osama bin Laden?

Blum:It was supposed to be a mini-encyclopedia of all the nefarious things done by the U.S. foreign policy. There’s a chapter on assassination, a chapter on bombings and so on. There are many chapters covering the gross and illegal aspects of U.S. foreign policy. It’s compiled together many things which most Americans, and most people in the world are not aware of.

Individual elements of each of these compilations one could find in some public area or other but to put it together into long tables of information was my contribution and that came out in about 2000. And then in 2006 the Arabic version of the book, the book had many foreign translations, there were two in Arabic and one of those two was read by Osama bin Laden and he, in one of his periodic audio recordings, mentioned that Americans would be well served if they read my book and get a better understanding of their enemy.

And I can only guess that the theme in that book Rogue State which most caught his attention and his sympathy was one chapter dealing with the motivations of anti-American terrorists. Contrary to what we were being taught, and still now to a large extent, were that these people were: just hated America, or they hated Christianity, or they were just crazy, or they were just envious of democracy and our wealth, all of these reasons, but never even a hint that they were acting out of retribution for the decades of very serious military and other infringements upon people in the Middle East. All kinds of bombings and overthrows of governments, supporting dictatorships, supporting Israel,all kinds of things I gave a long list of the American actions which created all these anti-American terrorists, and that is what I am assuming most appealed to Bin Laden.

Robles: What do you know about the assassination plot to kill Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa? Before the elections, he is supposed to be assassinated.

Blum:This month you are speaking about?

Robles: Yes sir. Correa made this statement that they had uncovered a plot to assassinate him before...

Blum:I wouldn’t doubt that. I would be surprised if the CIA did not attempt to assassinate him. I mean among other reasons, he’s sheltering Assange! That by itself is reason to assassinate him.

Robles: Are you saying that just the fact that he’s given asylum to Assange, that’s enough for the CIA to assassinate him?

Blum:The CIA attempts to assassinate people for much less reasons than that. Assange is the public enemy №1 in America. The U.S. is obsessed with him and they are afraid that he will be issuing the realease of more classified documents so they’d really like to put him out of the way, if they can.

They were all set to invade the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, when the British government was finally talked out of it by their own people: That it would set a terrible precedent, that the U.K. Embassies all over the world would not be safe then. That was the reason that they called off the invasion plan.

They’re very serious about Assange. I mean he has to go. He’s the most marked man in the world.

Robles: You think so? You said he’s enemy number one of the United States.

Blum: As far as being put out of the way? Yeah. I would say that if the US had a choice it would get him out of the way before anyone else.

Robles: So you think it’s pretty credible his fears of being assassinated by the CIA? Yeah?

Blum:There is a drone somewhere with his name on it, and if he walks around in the world and he is not in the midst of a big city, he’s a marked man. There’s a rocket with his name on it inside of a drone with his name on it. So I can not imagine that would not be the case. The CIA has, if you delve as much as I have into the history of assassinations and so on, that is totally expected.

Robles: So as an expert you are saying that it is totally expected?! Wow! Okay

Blum: If he’s walking around free somewhere. Yeah.

Robles: Sure. I see. I see. Hey Bill thank you very much! I really appreciate you speaking with me!

William Blum is the author of several books on US foreign policy. He also sends out a monthly newsletter called “The Anti-Empire Report”

 PART 2

 

Last Update: 09/23/2017 10:35 +0300

 

Site 1JAR2 Blog Button

 

JAR2 Biz

 

 Link to JAR2 YouTube Account  Link to JAR2 Blogger Account  Link to JAR2 Live Journal Account  Link to JAR2 Word Press Account    Link to JAR2 Sonation and Support Page

 

  Please help keep us going and make a donation Thanks to all supporters!

PayPal, Yandex, Qiwi, Сбербанк Sberbank Visa 4276 3800 4543 8756

Copyright JAR2 2003-2017 All Rights Reserved

Publishing Banned Truth Since June 06, 2003