An Iranian scientist was executed by his government after being convicted of spying for the United States — and former Blackwater CEO Erik Prince believes the former Secretary of State “playing fast and loose with national security matters, very likely caused this guy to die.”
On Sunday, the Iranian government confirmed that Shahram Amiri, who was named in the emails hacked from Clinton’s private server, was hanged last week. While Amiri had claimed to be kidnapped by American and Saudi agents, there are reports that he had been working as a paid informant with the CIA — providing information about Iran’s nuclear program.
In the emails taken from Clinton’s hacked private server, they refer to Amiri as “our friend,” and discuss him just a week and a half before he returned to Tehran.
“We have a diplomatic, ‘psychological’ issue, not a legal one. Our friend has to be given a way out,” an email forwarded to Clinton by her senior advisor Jake Sullivan stated on July 5, 2010. “Our person won’t be able to do anything anyway. If he has to leave, so be it,” it concludes.
On July 12, Amiri was discussed in another email from Sullivan.
“The gentleman … has apparently gone to his country’s interests section because he is unhappy with how much time it has taken to facilitate his departure,” Sullivan wrote. “This could lead to problematic news stories in the next 24 hours.”
The Clinton campaign has repeatedly claimed that her server posed no threat to national security, but many believe that Amiri’s blood is on her hands — as the emails provided proof that he had defected to anyone doing a quick search through the files.
“In the emails that were on Hillary Clinton’s private server, there were conversations among her senior advisers about this gentleman,” he said. “That goes to show just how reckless and careless her decision was to put that kind of highly classified information a private server. I think her judgment is not suited to keep this country safe,” Senator Tom Cotton asserted on Sunday’s episode of Face the Nation.
In an interview with Breitbart News Daily on Monday, former Navy Seal and Blackwater CEO Erik Prince stated that Clinton’s recklessness with the emails lead to his execution.
“The physicist that came out, he defected, he was a treasure trove of information, but the CIA and the Clinton State Department botched it while he was in the States, left him pretty much unsupported,” Prince explained. “The second time he calls home, the Iranian intelligence service answers the phone. Undoubtedly, they leveraged him. When the guy talks about psychological trauma here in the United States, I’m sure it’s because the Iranians were telling him all the things they were going to do to his family if he didn’t come home,” said Prince.
“Once again, the administration screwed it up. He goes home; of course, he’s arrested. And then Hillary’s emails, which were in the open, certainly readable by foreign powers, were talking about Hillary’s so-called friend, who was a defection, and not an abduction, as the guy was claiming,” he added.
Amiri had been sentenced to prison upon his return, but following the release of the emails he was taken out and executed, Prince noted.
“When he went back to Iran, there was no talk of him being executed. Once her emails were released, he was executed. What does it mean? It means, once again, America does not take care of the people that help America. This guy was a treasure trove of information on the Iranian nuclear program. He’s dead. We leave the Pakistani doctor who helped us find bin Laden, still in Pakistani prison,” he explained.
“In no uncertain terms, Prince explained that beyond the tragedy for the Amiri family, his execution will have longterm effects on our national security — as one can no longer be sure they will be protected if they help the US government.
“This administration, particularly Hillary Clinton, plays fast and loose with classified information, and doesn’t really care about the people who help America, and they suffer, and our national security will suffer for it yet again in the long term,” Prince concluded.
Submitted by Diana Johnstone (author Queen of Chaos), via Contra Corner blog,
On June 2, a few days before the California primary, Hillary Clinton gave up trying to compete with Bernie Sanders on domestic policy. Instead, she zeroed in on the soft target of Donald Trump’s most “bizarre rants” in order to present herself as experienced and reasonable. Evidently taking her Democratic Party nomination for granted, she is positioning herself as the perfect candidate for hawkish Republicans.
Choosing to speak in San Diego, home base of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, on a platform draped with 19 American flags and preceded by half an hour of military marching music, Hillary Clinton was certain of finding a friendly audience for her celebration of American “strength”, “values” and “exceptionalism”. Cheered on by a military audience, Hillary was already assuming the role to which she most ardently aspires: that of Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.
Whenever Hillary speaks, one must look for the lies. The biggest lies in this speech were lies of omission. No mention of her support for the invasion of Iraq, no mention of the disaster she wrought in Libya, no mention of her contribution to pursuing endless death and destruction in the Middle East.
But she also lied in claiming partial credit for the Iran nuclear deal, which she had tended to block, and most profoundly in presenting herself as a champion of diplomacy. As Secretary of State, she blocked diplomacy that would have prevented or ended conflict, most notoriously concerning Libya, where even senior U.S. military officers were told to cut off their contacts with Gaddafi agents seeking a peaceful compromise.
The Washington Post reported prior to the speech that her campaign “hopes there are many more national-security-minded Republicans and independents who would vote for her, even grudgingly, rather than see Trump win the White House.”
The Washington Post noted that the state of California’s “defense industry and military bases lend a backdrop for her speech.” Indeed! Hillary Clinton is quite simply catering to the military-industrial complex, as she has been doing throughout her career. She is catering to the arms industry, which needs to keep the American people scared of various “threats” in order to continue draining the nation’s wealth into their profitable enterprises. She needs the support of military men and women who believe in all those threats invented by intellectuals in think tanks and editorial offices.
This is the core of the “national-security-minded” electorate that Hillary is targeting. She warned that Trump would jeopardize the wonderful bipartisan foreign policy that has been keeping us great and safe for decades.
In reality, such “national-security-minded” leaders as Dick Cheney and Clinton herself have led the United States into wars that create chaos, inspire enemies and endanger everybody’s national security. Despite the geographically safe position of the United States, it is that bipartisan War Party that has created genuine threats to U.S. national security by prodding the hornets’ nest of religious fanaticism in the Middle East and provoking nuclear-armed Russia by aggressive military exercises right up to its borders.
The basis of Hillary Clinton’s world view is that notorious “American exceptionalism” which Obama has also celebrated. If we don’t rule the world, she suggested, “others will rush in to fill the vacuum”. She clearly cannot conceive of dealing respectfully with other nations. The United States, she proclaimed, is “exceptional – the last best hope on earth.”
Not all people on earth feel that way. So they must be brought to heel. In practice, this “exceptionalism” means acting above the law. It means a unipolar world policed by U.S. armed forces. In practice, Hillary’s devotion to “our allies” means fighting wars in the Middle East for the benefit of Israel and of Saudi Arabia, whose arms purchases are indispensable for our military industrial complex. It means bombing countries and overthrowing foreign governments, from Honduras to Syria and beyond, in order to help them conform to “our values”.
Trump is groping clumsily, at times idiotically, toward a major shift in US foreign policy. He is ill-prepared for the task.If ever elected, he would have to fire the neocons and take on a whole new team of experts to educate and guide him. That would be something of a miracle.
But some of Hillary’s reproaches aimed at Trump’s “reckless, risky” foreign policy statements are not as self-evident as she assumes. For example, his statement that he would sit down to negotiate with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. Is that really such a crazy idea?
North Korea is a small country, whose leaders call themselves “communist” but who are essentially a dynasty that emerged from the resistance against Japanese invaders in World War II. Their quarrel with South Korea stemmed from the domination of Japanese collaborators in that part of the country. That is practically ancient history, and today North Korea feels threatened – and is indeed threatened – by the everlasting U.S. military presence on its borders. A small isolated country like North Korea is not a real “threat” to the world. Even with nuclear weapons. Its much-vaunted nuclear weapons are clearly meant both to defend itself from attack and as a bargaining chip.
So would it be so terrible to sit down and find out what the bargain might be? Basically, North Korean leaders would like to make a deal to lessen the U.S. threat and bring their country out of isolation. Why not discuss this, since it could lead to the end of the “North Korean threat” which is artificial anyway?
Hillary’s reaction is typical. She boasts that her solution is to build up an expensive missile defense shield in Japan and increase everybody’s military buildup in the region. As usual, she goes for the military solution, ridiculing the notion of diplomacy.
Hillary Clinton’s speech will certainly sound convincing to the “national security minded” because it is so familiar. The same as George W. Bush but delivered with much greater polish. America is good, America is great, we must remain strong to save the world. This is the road to disaster.
Sign up become a patron and Show your support for alternative news
for Just 1$ a month you can help Grow We are change
We use Bitcoin Too !
Visit The Gear Store Wearechange.org/gear
Danny F. Quest is a official 9/11 Truther, anti-war activist, humanitarian, Blogger, and writer/contributer for WeareChange.org Follow him on Social Media.
“On November 4, Canada’s newly elected Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was sworn into office. Trudeau and the Liberal Party promise to legalize marijuana in Canada, which would make it only the second country to formally legalize the sale and consumption of cannabis. (Uruguay became the first, in 2013 — contrary to popular belief, pot is not technically legal in the Netherlands, but it is tolerated).
On November 3, the Irish government announced decriminalization of not just marijuana but also heroin and cocaine. The chief of Ireland’s National Drugs Strategy told the papers there was a “strong consensus that drugs across the board should be decriminalised.”
… users and addicts would no longer be locked up for their personal consumption. The results from Portugal’s decriminalization of all drugs in 2001 have been extremely extraordinary: deaths, addiction, and HIV infections from drugs have all dropped precipitously.
On November 5, the criminal chamber of the Mexican Supreme Court ruled that the country’s ban on marijuana was unconstitutional and found that individuals have a right to grow, possess, and use marijuana.”
Continue reading …
War On ‘Drugs’, Really War On The People
“As a result of (stricter cannabis laws) lots of coffee shops lost all of their customers, and those people (became) street-dealers.”