US Submarine That Attacked Syria ‘NOT WELCOME’ Back To Italy After ‘Failed’ Strike

The United States nuclear submarine that took part in the attack on Syria over the alleged chemical weapons use is not allowed back in the waters near Naples, Italy, the mayor declared.  The mayor states that he designated the city a “denuclearized zone” in 2015 and wants to keep it that way.

Naples Mayor Luigi de Magistris wrote last week to Rear Admiral Arturo Faraone, head of the city’s port authority, complaining that the official had given permission to allow Virginia-class submarine USS John Warner to pass through the Gulf of Naples on March 20, following a two-week exercise by Western military alliance NATO. Magistris argued that he had designated the city a “denuclearized zone” in a 2015 act that sought to “prohibit docking and parking of any vessel that is nuclear-powered or contains nuclear weapons” and declared Naples a “city of peace,” according to Italian newspaper La Repubblica.

“Our administration is not against anyone but it is in favor of policies of peace, disarmament and international cooperation,” de Magistris told Italian news service Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata on Monday. “It is in favor of diplomacy so that international institutions like the U.S. are the lead players in moments of crisis.  The fact that it is the same submarine (involved in the Syria attack) further reinforces the rightness of the order with which we said ships of nuclear propulsion or carrying nuclear weapons are not welcome in the port of Naples and, therefore, they are not allowed to travel through or stay,” he added.

Adding further insult to injury, Israel has come out saying the US-led strike on Syria, which was coordinated with the help of France and the United Kingdom, was a failure. Based on their goals outlined, which was to prevent Bashar al-Assad from using chemical weapons in the future, the US-led strike on the war-torn nation won’t accomplish that. Israeli intelligence said that the US strike was, for all intents and purposes, a waste of money because it didn’t take out anything, really.

“If President Trump had ordered the strike only to show that the US responded to [Syrian President Bashar] Assad’s use of chemical weapons, then that goal has been achieved,” Israel’s Ynetnews quoted a senior defense official as saying. “But if there was another objective — such as paralyzing the ability to launch chemical weapons or deterring Assad from using it again — it’s doubtful any of these objectives have been met.”

The Public Are All Alone: Understanding How The Enemy Of Your Enemy Is Not Your Friend

Authored by Eric Zuesse via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

In political matters, the public are taught to believe that some political Party is ‘good’, and that the others are “bad”; but the reality in recent times, at least in the United States, has instead been that both Parties are rotten to the core (as will be clear from the linked documentation provided here).

Belief in this myth (that the opposition between Parties is between ‘good’ ‘friend’ versus ‘bad’ ‘enemy’) is based upon the common adage that “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

One side is believed, and ones that contradict it are disbelieved - considered to be lying, distorting: bad. But, maybe, both (or all) Parties are deceiving; maybe all of them are enemies of the public, but just in different ways; maybe each of them is trying to control the country in the interests of (and so to obtain the most financial support from) the aristocracy, while all of them are actually against the public.

Can it really be false that “The enemy of my enemy is my friend?”

Not only can be, but often is. And no one is able to vote intelligently without recognizing this fundamental political fact.

It’s true between entire nations, too - not only within nations.

For example: Hitler and Stalin were enemies of each other, but neither of them was a friend of America (except that Stalin did more than anyone else to defeat Hitler, and thereby saved the world, though the U.S. — far less a factor than the U.S.S.R. was in defeating Hitler — still refuses to acknowledge the fact that Stalin did more than anyone else did to prevent the entire world’s becoming dictatorships; so, whatever democracy exists today, is a result of that dictator, Stalin, even more than it’s a result of either FDR or Churchill). 

What about internally, then?

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump became enemies of each other, but neither of them had ever really been a friend of the American public: both of them were instead liars who would, and did, do everything they could to grab control (on the aristocracy’s behalf, who financed their respective campaigns) over what is supposed to be our Government, in a democracy. That’s just a sad fact about reality, which both of America’s political Parties deny (because they both need those voters, not merely those mega-donations; they need the public to believe that the Party cares about them).

Most of the American public have been successfully deceived by the ‘news’media, and by the ‘history’-books (likewise published by agents for the aristocracy), to believe that the U.S. Government serves the public-interest, and not the interest of the centi-millionaires and especially billionaires, who finance political campaigns. But it’s no truer than it’s true that the enemy of your enemy is necessarily your friend: both enemies of each other can be your enemies, too. The difference here is that the enmity between the aristocracy and the public is basically intrinsic, whereas the enmities between (Republican versus Democratic, or any other divisions between) aristocrats, are basically personal — these are matters of business, instead of matters of state. They are, in a sense, different business-plans — competing business-plans. But they are all assisting the aristocracy, to control the public, so as to advance the interests of the aristocracy. They’re all competing for the aristocracy’s support, and deceiving for the public’s support. Two blatant recent examples displaying this were America’s invasion in 2003 that destroyed Iraq, and America’s invasion in 2011 that destroyed Libya. Did either of those invasions advance the interests of the American public? But the owners of Lockheed Martin and other ‘defense’ contractors blossomed after 9/11. In fact: U.S. arms-exports are at record highs. 

The now-proven reality in America is that the U.S. Government really does represent those billionaires and centi-millionaires, and not the public. It’s a now-proven reality, that the U.S. isn’t a democracy but a dictatorship - albeit, a two-Party one, with a real competition between billionaire and centi-millionaire Republicans on the one hand, versus billionaire and centi-millionaire Democrats on the other. But all billionaires and centi-millionaires are takers (that’s how they came to be super-rich, even the ones who didn’t inherit it from their parents), who (notwithstanding any ‘charity’ they may establish to avoid taxes while extending their control) receive from the public far more than they give to the public; and, so, there is actually an intrinsic class-war — not at all like Karl Marx famously said, between the bourgeoisie (including small-business owners) versus the proletariat (including some centi-millionaires and billionaires who became super-wealthy from being movie-stars or athletic stars and who don’t necessarily actually control any business at all, and so they’re “proletariats”), but instead between the aristocracy versus the public: the ancient and permanent class-conflict. It’s the entire aristocracy-of-wealth (which is maybe half of the nation’s wealth) that’s arrayed against the public (the poorer 99+% of the people). (In fact, Marx — the promoter of the view that the bourgeoisie are the public’s enemies — had aristocratic sponsors, and he would have remained obscure and died poor, if he had instead blamed the aristocracy, not “the bourgeoisie” — which is mainly the middle class — as being the exploiting-class. Marx, too, was an agent of aristocracy. He succeeded and became famous because he had aristocratic sponsors. Otherwise, his name would have simply been forgotten.)

Anyway, the American public are now alone. No Government represents our interests. It’s now been proven that America’s Government doesn’t represent us; and it’s not even the business of any other Government in the world to represent us; so, no foreign government does, either. No Government represents us.

In order to understand any aristocracy, one must understand what gives rise to almost all wars, because almost all wars throughout history have been between contending aristocracies - between the aristocracies of different nations. Each aristocracy needs to be able to fool its national public, to believe that they’re fighting against the foreign public, when, in fact, they’re fighting against the foreign aristocracy, and they’re fighting for the home-nation’s aristocracy - they are, almost always, fighting for one aristocracy, against another aristocracy. Any public who would know that this is the reality, would just as soon commit a democratic revolution, against the local aristocracy, as go to war for the local one, against the foreign ones. This is the reason why, in every dictatorship, the local centi-millionaires and billionaires buy up all of the ‘news’media that inform, or (on essential matters) misinform, their audiences about international relations, and about who did what to whom and why. They hire only ‘reporters’ who comply with whatever deceptions the owners feel to be necessary, in order to be able to attract sponsorships from other aristocrats’ corporations and ‘charities’. But, the aristocrats themselves are actually all in this together, because their mutually shared enemy is the public. Without deceiving the public about essential matters, no national news-medium would be able to attract the sponsorships it needs in order to grow, or even to survive.

The public thinks it’s fighting an international war, when, in fact, they’re fighting for the local aristocracy (and its allied aristocracies), against foreign aristocracies (and their allied aristocracies). This has been true since the dawn of human civilization. Only the weapons are bigger now, and the alliances (in the World Wars) are now global. (But, of course, if there is another World War, then all of human civilization will immediately end, and not long thereafter, all human and most other forms of life will also end.)

An excellent example of the real class-war, and of its international nature, is James Bamford’s 3 April 2012 masterful and pioneering article in Wired, “Shady Companies With Ties to Israel Wiretap the U.S. for the NSA”. He documented that even very high-up people in America’s NSA were kept out of the loop when joint U.S.-and-Israeli intelligence-agencies and private corporations were creating the present 1984-ish, “Big Brother” reality, in (at least) those countries (but, actually, the Sauds, and probably a few others, were also on the inside — the aristocracies not merely of those two countries, U.S. and Israel, are in the alliance).

The “Deep State” isn’t merely one nation’s aristocracy and its agents; it is basically a form of actually international gang-warfare. That’s what got us into invading and destroying Iraq 2003, Libya 2011, Syria 2012-, Ukraine (by coup 2014), and so many other nations. It wasn’t done in order to serve the America public’s interests. That’s just the standard lie — and it keeps going on, and on. Maybe until we invade Russia.

Germany Says It Found "No Evidence" Kaspersky Helped Russia Spy On US

US intelligence agencies are claiming that the Russian government leveraged the popularity of Kaspersky Labs’ cybersecurity software to create what is tantamount to a global spy network with the company’s explicit cooperation. However, Germany’s intelligence agencies say they’ve found “no evidence” to suggest these reports are true.

The Wall Street Journal, which last week reported that the US had identified at least one case of Kaspersky’s software improperly copying classified information, is back with another “exclusive” spoon fed to it by anonymous “senior US officials” alleging that Kaspersky allowed Russian government malware to piggy back on its software. The malware scanned for and copied files labeled “top secret,” not just in the US, but globally. Though WSJ neglects to list other countries that are suspected victims of Russian hacking.

Meanwhile, Germany"s BSI federal cyber agency said on Wednesday it had found no evidence to suggest that Russian hackers had used Kaspersky’s software to spy on US authorities. "There are no plans to warn against the use of Kaspersky products since the BSI has no evidence for misconduct by the company or weaknesses in its software," BSI said in an emailed response to questions about the latest media reports. "The BSI has no indications at this time that the process occurred as described in the media," according to Reuters.

Germany"s BSI, which also uses Kaspersky products for technical analyses, said it was in touch with U.S. officials and other security agencies about the issue so it could take action and issue a warning on short notice if required.

The Russian government used a popular antivirus software to secretly scan computers around the world for classified U.S. government documents and top-secret information, modifying the program to turn it into an espionage tool, according to current and former U.S. officials with knowledge of the matter.

The software, made by the Moscow-based company Kaspersky Lab, routinely scans files of computers on which it is installed looking for viruses and other malicious software. But in an adjustment to its normal operations that the officials say could only have been made with the company’s knowledge, the program searched for terms as broad as “top secret,” which may be written on classified government documents, as well as the classified code names of U.S. government programs, these people said.

After becoming suspicious that the Kaspersky software might be concealing malicious spyware, US intelligence agencies began scrutinizing the software, searching for signs that it was unknowingly copying and transmitting sensitive information.

For many months, U.S. intelligence agencies studied the software and even set up controlled experiments to see if they could trigger Kaspersky’s software into believing it had found classified materials on a computer being monitored by U.S. spies, these people said. Those experiments persuaded officials that Kaspersky was being used to detect classified information.

Later, WSJ notes that, in fact, it was Israeli intelligence that first alerted the US to Kaspersky’s skullduggery, effectively creating a separate, parallel narrative to explain how the deception was exposed.

So, which is it? Did the Israelis tell us? Or did the US discover the breach independently in 2015?

In an ironic twist, Kaspersky exposed Israel for lying about the source of its information on Iran deal talks after WSJ reported two years ago that Israel had spied on negotiations. Israel had said it received its intelligence by other means, but it had in reality infiltrated Kaspersky’s software, a fact the company publicly acknowledged in a research paper published two years ago.

In a twist, Kaspersky appears to have known, or at least suspected, that it had been hacked by Israel. In June 2015, the company published a detailed technical analysis about malicious computer code used to break into its systems, which it dubbed Duqu 2.0. Experts believe that the original Duqu malware, on which the one inside Kaspersky’s system appears to have been based, was used to spy on officials participating in international negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, a fact that Kaspersky acknowledged in its paper.

The Journal reported in 2015 that Israel had spied on closed-door talks among the U.S. and other world powers about curtailing Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Israeli officials denied spying directly on U.S. negotiators and said they received their information through other means, including close surveillance of Iranian leaders receiving the latest U.S. and European offers.

Which begs the question: Is it possible that Israel was the source of the Kaspersky hack? The country has been exposed for spying on the US before – and not just during the Iran negotiations. And it has also been exposed for infiltrating Kaspersky’s systems.

Keep in mind, suspicions about the infiltration first emerged two years ago at a time of heightened tension between the Obama administration and Israel. In an unprecedented move, the Department of Homeland Security ordered all federal agencies using Kaspersky’s software to uninstall it, effectively ending Kaspersky’s relationship with one of its largest clients.