|
|
Home | Switchboard | Unix Administration | Red Hat | TCP/IP Networks | Neoliberalism | Toxic Managers |
| (slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and bastardization of classic Unix | |||||||
| Home | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2011 |
For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section
|
|
Switchboard | ||||
| Latest | |||||
| Past week | |||||
| Past month | |||||
 |
 |
 |
October 24, 2014 | PaulCraigRoberts.org
Washington Is Defaming Putin
Paul Craig Roberts
UPDATE: Here is a translation of Putin's address at Valdai: http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/23137
Today at the Valdai International Discussion Club meeting in Sochi, Russia's President Putin correctly and justifiably denounced Washington for destabilizing the world in order to serve its own narrow and selfish interest and the interests of the private interest groups that control Washington at the expense of the rest of the world. It is about time a world leader denounced the thuggish neocon regime in Washington. Putin described Washington's double standards with the Roman phrase: "What is allowed for God [the US] is not allowed for cattle [the rest of the world]."
RT reports on Putin's address here: http://rt.com/news/198924-putin-valdai-speech-president/
RIA Novotsi reports here: http://en.ria.ru/politics/20141024/194537272/Putin-Global-Security-System-Seriously-Weakened-Deformed.html
Curiously, the Russian media has not, at this time of writing, produced an English translation of Putin's full remarks. Perhaps the Russian media do not realize the importance of Putin's words. Too much of the Russian media is owned by foreign interests who use the access to Russian readers to attack and discredit the Russian government. It is amazing that the Russian government allows Washington's propaganda within its own ranks. Perhaps Moscow accepts Washington's propaganda among Russians in order to protect the broadcasts in the US of RT, RIA, and Voice of Russia. But the balance is uneven. The Russian broadcasts in the West report otherwise unreported news; they do not defame America.
See also:
Putin: world leaders blackmailed: http://en.ria.ru/world/20141024/194542305/Putin-Says-Reports-Show-World-Leaders-Could-Be-Blackmailed-With.html
Putin: US escalates worldwide conflict: http://rt.com/news/198924-putin-valdai-speech-president/
German MP: sanctions without proof: http://en.ria.ru/interview/20141014/194062719/German-MP-Germany-Has-No-Evidence-of-Who-Shot-Down-MH17.htmlI did not see any reporting of Putin's address in the US print and TV media. Clearly in the US there is an absence of public discussion of US foreign policy and foreign reaction to it. A country in which propaganda and silence rule out awareness and public discussion is not a democracy regardless of what it calls itself.
Washington long ago learned the dark art of silencing truth with defamation. Washington used defamation to overthrow Iran's elected leader, Mossadegh in 1953, to overthrow Congo's prime minister Patrice Lumumba in 1960, to overthrow Guatemala's President Arbenz in 1954, to overthrow Venezuela's President Hugo Chevez in 2002, a coup that was cancelled by the Venezuelan people and military who threw out Washington's stooge replacement and reinstalled Chavez, to overthrow Ukraine's elected President Yanukovych in 2013, to overthrow Honduras President Manuel Zelaya in 2009 , to overthrow in 2013 Mohamed Morsi, president of the first democratically elected government in Egypt's history, to overthrow Gaddafi in Libya, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, in ongoing efforts to overthrow Assad in Syria and the government of Iran, and in failed attempts to overthrow Indonesia's Sukarno, Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, and Castro in Cuba.
Today Washington's target is Vladimir Putin. This is the height of folly and hubris. Putin's public support far exceeds that of any American president in history. Currently, the level of public support for the Obama regime and the US Congress is far too low to be compatible with a functioning democracy. If the US is actually a democracy, it is the most dysfunctional democracy in world history. Practically no one, except the powerful private interest groups who own Washington, supports the US government. Everyone else despises Washington.
As the result of 13 years of murderous destruction of life and property in the Middle East and Africa, a dysfunctional and collapsing US economy, and a display of unrivaled arrogance, Washington has destroyed America's soft power. Abroad only the deluded few and those paid by US-financed NGOs still have a good opinion of the United States.
In all world polls, the US ranks as the greatest threat to world peace. Washington has made our country a despised nation, and we the people have done nothing about it.
You would never know this from the US print or TV media or even from most of the UK and Western European media. As I reported on October 16, Udo Ulfkotte, a former editor of one of Germany's most important newspapers, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, has written a best-selling book in which he reports that the CIA owns everyone of significance in the major European media. In his own words Udo Ulfkotte says that he was "taught to lie, to betray and not to tell the truth to the public." http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/10/16/cia-owns-everyone-significance-major-media/
As a former Wall Street Journal editor, Business Week columnist, columnist for the Scripps Howard News Service, columnist for a German magazine and French and Italian newspapers, I observed and experienced the gradual impoundment of any dissent from Washington's line. It became clear that the path to journalism success in the West was to lie for the Establishment in Washington, largely a private establishment along with the dark off-budget "security" agencies bolstered by the neoconservative ideology of US world hegemony.
Much of Russian media and Putin's advisors are fully aware of Washington's media campaign to defame President Vladimir Putin. http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/756160 The internet site Russia Insider today asked the pertinent question: "Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin?" As Russia Insider makes clear, the answer is most certainly. http://russia-insider.com/en/politics_media_watch/2014/10/24/04-54-03pm/cia_running_defamation_campaign_against_putin
Click the URL above and view the front pages of the UK Sun, Daily Mirror, and Daily Express. I would bet that these are front pages designed in Washington or Langley and are in fact paid ads by the CIA or National Endowment for Democracy or by one of the Republican or Democrat organizations that sponsor Washington's overseas propaganda.
Of course, these UK rags can be dismissed as sensational junk comparable to the US versions that are for sale at grocery store checkout counters–"movie star abducted by aliens in UFO." So scroll down the page of the above URL and look at the covers of Newsweek and The Economist. Once these were respected publications. Today I would bet that no one reads them and that they are dependent on CIA subsidies for their existance. Nevertheless, they impact the European, Canadian, Australian, and Japanese media and no doubt the media of other countries on the borders of the US empire. A number of gullible fools still think that America has a free press.
Be sure to notice this section of the report from Russia Insider:
"The issue of manipulation of news by intelligence services has been in the news recently with revelations that the CIA and German Secret Service (GSS) have long-running programs to influence how media executives and top journalists convey and interpret the news, including direct cash payments.
"Here are some examples they point to:
- Portraying him [Putin] as a scheming dictator trying to rebuild a repressive empire.
- Claiming he personally ordered the murder of a number of journalists, and personally ordered a KGB defector to be murdered with radiation poisoning.
- Frequently citing unsubstantiated rumors he is having an affair with a famous gymnast.
- Allegations that he has stashed away billions for his personal benefit, without providing evidence.
- Recent article in newsweek claiming he leads a luxurious and lazy lifestyle, sleeping late.
- Recent article in NYT focusing on a supposed personal arrogance.
- Hillary Clinton mentioning in speech after speech that he is a bad guy, a bully, that one must confront him forcefully.
- Frequently using pejoratives to describe his person – "a jerk and a thug" (Thomas Friedman this week in the NYT)
- Mis-quoting him on his regret about the collapse of the Soviet Union.
- Articles about a supposed super-luxury villa built for him in southern Russia.
- The over-the top headlines in the western media (they were worst of all in Germany) portraying him personally responsible for murdering the victims of MH17.
- And soft stuff – magazine covers making him look sinister, monstrous, etc."
If you are not already aware, I am pleased to introduce you to The Saker, a pseudonym for a high level US military analyst who lives in Florida. No, it is not me. Be sure to read the interview with Saker, which is at the bottom of the article: http://russia-insider.com/en/politics_media_watch/2014/10/24/04-54-03pm/cia_running_defamation_campaign_against_putin
Every day readers ask me what they as individuals can do. Some possibly are government trolls who hope I will answer "overthrow the government" so that I can be arrested as a terrorist. My answer to the question is that people are powerless until enough of them are informed. If people become informed and will take a stand, then the people can force the government back under their control. If this does not or cannot happen, democracy in America is dead, and our life as a free people protected by the Constitution and law against the power of the state is finished.
Possibly America is already finished and will now finish the rest of the world in its insane neoconservative drive to establish Washington's hegemony over the entire world. Russia and China are not going to submit to being Washington's vassals and India had enough of being a colony under Great Britain. If the crazed hegemons in Washington persist, nuclear war will be the outcome.
|
|
|
vineyardsaker.blogspot.co.uk
I am getting a flood of emails asking me about the article Putin's Head - Who will remove the head of Russian President Putin and offer it on a platter to the U.S.? (also here) I normally don't comment any of the nonsense which circulates on the Internet, but this one seems to have a lot of people worried.
Friends, the key to the entire article is right at the beginning: "It seems that Russian authorities have found a way towards accommodation with the West. Liberals have become more powerful and are leading the talks". Every word in these two sentences is utterly false. For one thing, Putin is "the Russian authorities". His power stems from three sources:
1) He was elected by the Russian people
2) He is solidly backed by the "power ministries" (Internal, Security, Military, Police, Intelligence, Emergencies)
3) His current popularity is somewhere in the high 80%In other words, removing him would be legally impossible, physically impossible and politically impossible.
Second, if anybody seriously believes that Putin is seeking an accommodation with the West then he/she simply needs to listen to his latest speech at the Valdai club to come to realize that far from seeking any accommodation, Putin is fully ready for a long confrontation with the AngloZionist Empire.
Finally, because of their failure to overthrow Putin during the Presidential elections and, even more so, because of the civil war in the Ukraine, the Russian liberals have never been weaker then before: they are associated with the nightmarish 1990s and they are seen as allies of any and all Russia-hating forces be it Wahabi Chechens or Ukrainian Nazis and as tool of the US/EU/NATO.
Finally, when the authors write "Russian "patriots" dream stubbornly of convincing today's President to imitate Stalin or Ivan The Terrible" they are completely misrepresenting the ideology and wordview of the Russian patriotic movement.
This worthless article is a typical example of the kind of anti-Putin propaganda organized by the US: if they cannot demonize him, they at least show him as weak and about to be sacrificed. There will be much more of that nonsense in the future and I urge you all to simply ignore it.
The Saker
Mats
They are spreading cancer rumors out of Germany, which is typical crap from a desperate psyops.
Anonymous
One recent development which signifies the spontaneous coalescence of the different groups is commented of all msm by The Moscow Times today.
The long disputing Rosneft and Gazprom, have decided to colaborate. True is that the talking of development of industry has to becomemore than an expression of wishes, and for that, the Central Bank, today steered by the Atlanticists, has to direct credit to entrepreneurs.
Something really remarkable, Rosneft asked for 40billion dollars to the Finance Ministry, the request was rejected.
The speech in Valdai left no ambiguities, Russia is for real, no longer one more element of the AZ chain
Anonymous
By Sharon Tennison
in April 21, 2014
RUSSIA REPORT: PUTIN" I had two encounters in 2013 with State Department officials regarding Putin:
At the first one, I felt free to ask the question I had previously yearned to get answered: "When did Putin become unacceptable to Washington officials and why? Without hesitating the answer came back: "'The knives were drawn' when it was announced that Putin would be the next president." I questioned WHY? The answer: "I could never find out why––maybe because he was KGB." I offered that Bush #I, was head of the CIA. The reply was, "That would have made no difference, he was our guy.""
So the angloamericans got angry because they wanted some other man -may be Medvedev ? - as president rather than Putin though the masses wanted Putin all along.
So angloamerican had the audacity to want some other man to be president of a major nation despite the fact that Putin was liked by more than 67% of voters! If that is called western democracy then that western democracy must be bombed into oblivion.
That is why so called democracy is a fraud.
Anonymous
Having looked at the article, the websites and the lack of information on how the organisations are funded, I think that this article can be safely written off as absolute bullshit.
Seamus Padraig said...
Yes, Saker. I, too, just saw these absurd articles over at Information Clearing House. I am shocked they actually published such drivel. They are usually a good source. When I read them, I thought it was satire, a joke.
But you're right. They're going to keep pushing the 'Putin is weak' meme because, frankly, nothing else has worked. They're getting that desperate.
Anonymous said...
They tried the very same kind of BS to avoid Dilma Rousseff to be reelected in Brazil.I speak portuguese, I lived in Brazil, my son is Brazilian though I know the country politics quiet well this for more than 35 years.
Believe me I NEVER saw such an ugly presidential campaign like that one.They tried everything possible as they were desperate,by reading the polls. Diffamation, insults, personal attacks on Rousseff and Lula. She got 100 pct of the MSM against her, and she won finally against both Soros/Cia puppets(Silva and Neves).
They are now talking about 'impeachment' for no real reason. They could even kill her or Lula who will be candidate in 2018(for a third mandate)
They will try to destroy the BRICS and not only Russia this at ANY price, including WW3 if necessary.
Attempts being made to suppress Russia, BRICS in international arena - experts
http://en.itar-tass.com/world/757231
It maybe would be wise for Putin to have more countries into the BRICS alliance(Argentina, Chile, Equator, maybe Malaysia or Indonesia ?)
They are buzy trying another orange revolution now in Budapest (the pretext being the 'internet tax').
They will proceed to Serbia just after if they do not want to enter the EU.It if full war now or never.
With some Russian help, Hungary,Serbia could switch from the EU side to Eurasia. And I'm sure as we have one country leaving the EU,more will follow. They are just terrorized now to do it. To be the first to leave.
The Eurozone is a disaster(deflation,no growth at best or even recession/depression),austerity is killing,mass unemployment...
Politics will have no other choice than total chaos and war.
Kat Kan said...
All these stories popping up about Putin having cancer (or whatever, there are several variations) are all part of the PUTIN IS WEAK story. Maybe he's even doing desperate stuff because he knows he won't be around for the consequences. That kind of stupid thinking. I am amazed they've not yet come up with "brain tumour" to justify calling all his moves "disease-driven".
It's all desperate attempts to make Putin's actions disappear, to make them not count, to make them not really real.
Anonymous
Moscow Times is a part of the same "anglozionist" anti-russian media empire dominating the west. They are owned by Finnish media conglomerate Sanoma, whose newspapers are filled with one-sided anti-russian propaganda.
Just in case anyone thought they are a pro-Russian source..
Anonymous said...
Gfreek's take of Moscow Times can also be read as the AZs wish to downgrade the fact that the issue is not of victimhood but about what kind of world we wish and need to build upon for all. So, the discourse trap is on both sides:
- surrender or die. (Azs)
- we build something in multipolar terms, unity in diversity. Quite a different context than proposal no.1
Certainly the MSM and the Western commandeers will not unanimously and right away buy proposal no. 2, but certainly both in France and Germany they are reading carefully. Not to mention the rest of the world. The gaunt has been thrown, and there is no denial but on the West.
mjm
Greetings from Singapore:
No disrespect, but having some readers which require constant re-assurance that Putin is in power and doing the right thing, Saker can do without it.
The West is having a massive psyops under way in Europe, Asia & Africa to create fear and insecurity.
If you are coming to this blog, you are beyond propaganda & psyops, you are smarter, at least this is my assumption.
Mulga Mumblebrain:
Anonymous 00.28, Brazil is being primed for 'regime change'. I'm quite surprised that the 'The election was rigged' lie wasn't trotted out, but the likelihood of further, US fomented, civil strife is very great indeed.
The entirely, and viciously, Rightwing MSM sewer will overflow with hate, and impeachment, or, Mordor on the Potomac's preference I would say, a military coup, is definitely on the cards. The USA is absolutely determined to destroy the BRICS, and Rouseff is not, I would say, up to the task of resisting it.
Anonymous said...
So, America's aristocracy supports both the Saudi and the Qatari aristocracies, despite their disagreements, in order to defeat the aristocracies in Russia, China, and the other "BRIC" countries, and so to retain the American Empire as being an empire, not just a country; and, in fact, as being the only Empire.
|
|
|
October 25, 2014 | The Greanville Post • Vol. VIII
Who will remove the head of the Russian President and offer it on a platter to the USA?
By Vasily Koltashov and Boris Kagarlitsky
[1]Translated from the Russian by Gaither Stewart
It seems that Russian authorities have found a way towards accommodation with the West. Liberals have become more powerful and are leading the talks.[2] They are ready to make concessions and see no problem in the sacrifice of Novorossiya, and, if necessary, even Russia's own interests. There's just one remaining question: who will remove the Russian President's head and present it on a platter to the USA?
Negotiations between Russia and the West about ending the "sanctions war" and resolving the crisis in Ukraine are moving full speed ahead. This was spoken of in October at the G20 finance ministers' talks in the USA. The Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov discussed the subject with Secretary of State John Kerry. The Ukrainian question will be a major subject for many participants at the G20 summit in Australia. Although Russian authorities deny they will ask for revocation of the sanctions, talks are underway about this issue. It was precisely for this that Moscow began the dialogue with the West, reduced its criticism of the Kiev regime, allowed the latter's military forces time to regroup by agreeing to the Minsk ceasefire, and blocked delivery of ammunition to Novorossiya. And also obliged dependent Donetsk political leaders to accept compromising decisions smacking of one-sided capitulation. Field commanders and the people of the Donbass will never accept these conditions, but the Russian elite is not yet aware of this since it has a poor understanding of what "the people" really amounts to.
Already in August the EU ambassador in Moscow remarked that the sanctions could be revoked. The Minsk talks showed that Russian authorities had begun bargaining with their Western partners and were ready for concessions. Moscow's goodwill was expressed in its reductions of supplies of weapons to Novorossiya, a purging within its political leadership and a distancing from its military leaders. Moscow is playing no small part in the weakening of the defensive capabilities of the territories in revolt. If talks with the West proceed successfully, then the Russian leadership will "concede": it will permit troops of the Kiev government to begin a new attack, leaving the struggling Novorossiya without support.
The presidential administration and the government are working in agreement, without obvious contradictions. Everything points to a new strengthening of the Liberal camp within the regime, and to the acceptance by Vladmir Putin of the liberals' overall plan. And the blame lies with the economic situation, the markets, financial problems and the fears of the elites.
In the autumn world oil prices sank unexpectedly sharply. In mid-October the price of a barrel of "black gold" fell to US $85. Russia's economic situation worsened swiftly, but no one in the government intends changing course. Although, in effect, precisely that course – long before the economic sanctions pushed Russia to its own economic sanctions – is the fundamental reason for the current difficulties. The governing circles count on the world market and refuse to develop the internal market, which would mean the search for a social compromise (concessions to workers). The reduction of imports in favor of domestic production and a radical change of personnel remain simply topics for conversation. The real work of the government is directed toward conciliation with the West in order to maintain the neoliberal course.
Sanctions imposed by the USA, EU and other governments have proven to be effective. But it was not this that undermined our economy, but because they scared our elites. They showed Russia's governing class its financial vulnerability. Still, precisely the fall in raw material prices on the global market was the signal for the elite that further exchange of sanctions was dangerous. The restriction of deliveries of Russian goods to the European market will contradict WTO regulations. But the introduction of such sanctions is very possible in conditions of a fall in demand and the growth of competition. The USA permitted Iranian hydrocarbons to [be shipped to] Europe, and Moscow lowered its tone-it is surrendering its positions and intends bargaining for stability instead. But if the state builds its economic policy on the export of raw materials, it will never be either independent or a really powerful player in international politics.
However much we are told of "Russian imperialism", contemporary Russia is above all a dependent, peripheral country, whose ruling class does not wish to carry out a transformation which would permit genuine independence and influence in the world – because these transformations would inevitably hurt the interests of the contemporary elite. At least, the interests of an important part of it.
The Russian authorities have already made clear to the USA and the EU that they reject any possibility of the uprising being victorious throughout the whole of Ukraine. They have blockaded it on the territories occupied by the militias. Throughout the summer the Kremlin's chief political advisor, Vladislav Surkov, worked on defusing the rebellious Donbass. But aid to the Kiev regime and subsequent agreement with the West did not succeed. The other side did not accept the counter-plan. In Moscow they decided that they faced two problems: the excessively principled "Colorados" [Ukrainian slang for the Donbass fighters] and the USA. Within the government, the supporters of the struggle gradually grew weaker. Putin designed an internal compromise, whose essence is: negotiations and concessions in order to normalize relations with the West.
Sacrificing Novorossiya, relying on European ruling circles and appeasing the USA-such is the current plan of the domestic elites in order to end the conflict. They understand this very well in Brussels and Washington and enter step by step into the negotiation game with Moscow. But while the Russian ruling class strives only to defend its positions and assets in the West, North American and European capital needs to make gains at Russia's expense. This includes not only the full occupation of Ukraine, whilst allowing the formal retention of the Crimea by Moscow, but accessibility to the Russian market, its assets and raw material resources.
The USA and the EU know that strong governments in Russia are the product of the growth of powerful business and its organization. The presence of a strong guardian and government in the figure of the present state permitted the corporations to more effectively compete and develop. Thus sanctions are intended to divide Russian capital, while talks and concessions weaken the state apparatus that obstructs the ability of the West to agitate among the population for regime change. A long process of bargaining between Moscow and its partners should strengthen even more the positions of the bureaucrats-Liberals. They are likely to achieve greater importance in the eyes of big business. Then the West will pose the question of removing the arbiter of Russian politics, Vladimir Putin, discredited in the eyes of the "civilized world".
The West demands Putin's head without fail. It is not only a question of the reputation of Western politicians who have already branded the Russian President, and now need to complete the plot of the latest victory over the latest dictator, as has happened earlier. The question of power in Russia also has a practical significance. That is not exactly the way the liberal press describes it. In no way does Putin resemble a lone ruler, taking wild decisions. On the contrary, his power is based on compromise, the balance of forces and the building of collective government of the country-for an oligarchic regime by its very nature is incompatible with personal power.
But it is precisely Putin's moderation and his ability to maintain a balance within the elites, to satisfy and tranquillize each, to listen to all and try to respect all interests supporting his leading role, the basis of his "stability", has become his major weakness.
For the US and the EU it is not only important to stop the process of post-Soviet integration that Moscow has initiated, or to block Russia's territorial, commercial and industrial rebirth. Also vital to the West is to destroy the system of compromises among the major business groups linked to Putin. According to the US and EU, partisans of the "Russian world" and import replacement should not be heeded any longer. Power's rhetoric must be purged of such dangerous subjects. The regime in Russia must become more liberal and openly pro-western, and its economics-firmly peripheral.
Such is the plan of the [Russian-style] liberal revolution. Putin does not have any "cunning plan" with which to counterbalance it and offset the moves by the West. Nor is there planned any "radical change of personnel by the President". A radical change of personnel cannot be executed while leaving all the key figures in their places and strengthening the positions of those players who are obviously opposed to the official line.
An old Russian fairy tale about evil boyars[3] surrounding a good Tsar makes more sense today than during the times of the feudal monarchy. For in fact the Tsar could not nominate his boyars, who inherited their posts. But in a republic, even in such a strange country resembling Tsardom as in our country, the President nominates and confirms the functionaries. That however does not mean that "the republican Tsar" does not have problems with his boyars. It is an enormous problem. For Putin it is simply impossible to gather a cohesive, loyal and capable team – which confirms that his power is far from being that of a Tsar.
For all that, there is a liberal plot against Putin and the system of power formed around him. And the great misfortune is that apparently Putin himself is a participant in it. By refusing to correct the economic policy of 2012-2014 he created the conditions for the development of the "second wave" of the crisis in Russia. The Cabinet of Dmitry Medvedev and the Central Bank headed by Elvira Nabiulina opened the door to the economic slump long before the fall of world petroleum prices. They consolidated still more the peripheral, raw material character of the domestic economy, making it vulnerable to the sanctions by the USA and its partners, and then began making concessions.
The West intends to play a power game in the long negotiations with Moscow. It can apply zeal and rigidity and therefore events will not go exactly as planned. The same happened in Ukraine. However, the USA and the EU understand that Russian liberals are now stronger and will stubbornly search for compromise. Dmitry Medvedev has already declared that a "rebooting of relations" demands a return to "default positions", that is, to normal trade without sanctions. For the sake of that the ruling class will go for anything, especially if the situation is complicated by economic factors. If a resolution of the issue with Western Europe and the USA requires the presenting of Putin's head, that is how the issue will be resolved.
But Russia is not a banana republic or a small East European country, where one can simply organize a color revolution, gathering several thousand activists of "civil society" on one of the central squares. Only Putin himself can remove Putin's head for the USA – and by no means only through carelessness.
Russian "patriots" dream stubbornly of convincing today's President to imitate Stalin or Ivan The Terrible. The liberal intelligentsias frighten each other and the credulous western public with this idea. And meanwhile our government each day comes to resemble an entirely different predecessor, Mikhail Gorbachev. Also, by the way, a politician who put his stake on compromise.
The maturing prospect of a liberal State Emergency Committee[4] becomes each day more evident. Meanwhile, before the final act the matter is not yet decided, but the drama has already begun. Liberals are carrying out the ritual sacrifice of the victims. They sacrifice the ruble exchange rate and social policies. They sacrifice Novorossiya. They sacrifice the dignity of the country. They sacrifice the possibilities for the development of Russian society. They are even ready to sacrifice that which has protected the system for many years. Still, all that will bear no fruit because only a different course can save Russia from an economic catastrophe.
And let no one be fooled: if the liberal revolution becomes a reality, its authors will quickly learn how correct the thesis "Ukraine is not Russia" really is. Unlike the neighboring country, Russia, with the exception of its capital, will be transformed into one entire Donbass.
Originally published: October 10, 2014
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
[1] Vasily Koltashov is Head of the Centre for Economic Research at the Moscow-based Institute of Globalisation and Social Movements (IGSO). Boris Kagarlitsky is the Director of IGSO.
[2] "Liberals" in the Russian context should be understood as sharing the views of right-wing neo-liberals in the West. Traditionally, the heroes of Russian liberals have included Thatcher, Reagan and improbably, Pinochet. A tiny, isolated current in Russian society generally, liberals have influence in big-business circles and represent an important contending faction within the Putin administration.
[3] The boyars were powerful noblemen who contended for power with medieval Russian tsars. Their influence was finally crushed by Tsar Peter II early in the eighteenth century.
[4] The reference is to the State Committee on the State of Emergency, which was formed by hard-line Communist Party leaders and state officials and which vied briefly for power during the failed coup against Mikhail Gorbachev in August 1991.
NOTICE: YOUR SUBSCRIPTIONS (SIGNUPS TO OUR PERIODICAL BULLETIN) ARE COMPLETELY FREE, ALWAYS. AND WE DO NOT SELL OR RENT OUR EMAIL ADDRESS DATABASES.
|
|
|
However, when one British newspaper reporter asked him specifically about the repeated reports of Russian army troops operating in east Ukraine, Putin chose to ignore the question completely.
theguardian.com
Puutin said that over the past two decades, the US had behaved as if it were someone "nouveau riche who had suddenly received a lot of wealth – in this case, global leadership". Instead of using its powers wisely, said Putin, the US had created a unilateral and unfair system.
The Russian president's sentiments were nothing new, but appeared to be a more concise and concentrated version of his grievances at a time when relations between Russia and the west are more strained than at any period since the cold war.
In a terse opening statement before taking questions for nearly three hours, Putin said: "The exceptionalism of the United States, the way they implement their leadership, is it really a benefit? And their worldwide intervention brings peace and stability, progress and peak of democracy? Maybe we should relax and enjoy this splendour? No!"
Beginner20 , 24 October 2014 7:08pmNot only. Putin directly said: the US is NOT democracy and never was. Whole speech is here.BillGoatse -> hiiipower , 24 October 2014 9:05pmIn regards to Islamic terrorism I agree. How many potential terrorists has the USA created by starting a war which has killed over half a million people?! How can they fight a 'war on terror' by bringing terror to millions of innocent people? It's all so illogical and tragic and there seems to be no end to this killing.nobledonkey , 24 October 2014 7:31pmIt seems obvious that America isn't killing so many civilians in the middle east for the good of the middle east civilians. They have been planning this for years. This video is a much watch! It has a former four star general and supreme commander of NATO explaining America planned to invade 7 countries. Why this video isn't more widely seen is a travesty.
General Wesley Clark: Wars Were Planned - Seven C…: http://youtu.be/9RC1Mepk_Sw
George Soros wants war with Russia and he wants the EU to help pay for it by way of inflation via the printing press i.e. further destroying the middle classes.http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/nov/20/wake-up-europe/?insrc=hpss
Europeans:
Are you ready to confront Russia in the name of Soros' billions?
The man has already invested quite a bit in shady NGOs like Open Society and the man was knee-deep in the theft and plundering of Russia during the 1990s by way of Renaissance Capital and other financial outfits.
How soon before Soros teams up with Khodorkovsky and his "Open Russia" NGO? Khodorkovsky wants to get back what he rightfully stole so that he can placate former business partners like Dick Cheney.
nobledonkey -> Alderbaran, 24 October 2014 9:05pm
jamesoverseas , 24 October 2014 7:56pmNobody wants war with Russia and to suggest that Khodorkovsky is driven by a desire to placate Cheney seems ludicrous.
The point I was illustrating is that Soros wants the EU to become more confrontational with Russia, at the expense of its own security and economic well-being, the latter of which would actually help his own financial interests.
The second point is that Khodorkovsky and Cheney were business partners in the past and that much of the opposition to Putin by men such as Khodorkovsky, Berezovsky, Kasparov, and Zakayev is closely linked not only to financial players like Soros but to the neo-conservatives as well; whose media figures have been the most hawkish re: Russia and not just since Ukraine blew up (again).
Yucos was comprehensively stolen from him under the direction of perhaps Russia's second most influential man - Sechen. This was at a time when Putin wanted to prevent Khordorkovsky moving into politics and Igor Sechen had an eye on the potential spoils of Yucos. Khordorkovsky has expressed a desire to see Russia become a successful democracy.
That's why I said that "Khodorkovsky wants back what he stole in the first place".
The idea that he wants Russia to be a successful democracy is laughable, especially in light of his treatment of employees during his heyday, in particular when he had police beat striking workers.
All these figures: American neo-conservatives, western finance, and Russian 'opposition' are bound in their desire to re-open Russia like the Yeltsin days so that it be plundered once again, for varying reasons ranging from personal power to the extension of American hegemonic ambitions.
You missed this nugget that explains his world viewSEARAY , 24 October 2014 7:57pm. To be fair has has a point. Syrian government not legitimate but Bahrain and Saudi governments are...can anyone explain the difference to me? (other than the syrian regime is more secular and protective towards minorities than the other two)The world works like this: the more loyalty you have to the single centre of power in the world, the more legitimate your govt is
Beckow, 24 October 2014 8:01pmPutin might be right. Things were not so bad in Ukraine until EU was reportedly "fucked" by Victoria Nuland.
What would Ukraine be like today without US-EU support for the violent revolution/coup in February in Kiev?JCBKing -> Beckow , 24 October 2014 8:07pm- There would be by now a normal presidential election with a new government (Ukraine for all its faults had a democracy and Yanukovitch and before him pro-Western Yushenko were elected)
- There would be no war in the Russian-speaking east and south
- Crimea would be safely in Ukraine
- Gas imports and trade with Russia would go on as before accounting for 30% of Ukraine's tradeInstead, Ukraine has a "revolutionary" government with all kinds of street radicals and pro-Western oligarchs running around saying some of the more stupid things in recent memory (US is going to give Marshall Plan, EU is going to open its borders to Ukrainian migrants, Russia has used nuclear missiles in Ukraine, etc...
The economy is dropping almost 10% a year with the worst still coming. There are 3,000 dead and the blood-thirsty rhetoric is still escalating.
Yes, this is a result of US meddling and support for the Maidan street protests. This is a result of 5 billion dollars spent by US on "NGO's" in Kiev. This is a result of Nuland's cookies.
Seems to me that it is self-evident that US has supported Ukraine's revolution. It is also self-evident that it has been a failure and Ukraine will suffer for a very long time. But since Putin said it, I am sure many will scream and shout and demonize instead of rational thinking. Quite a spectacle we see among Western intellectuals.... Were you always like this? Or is it something about Russia that drives you incoherent with rage?
The Ukrainians would also have 15 billion extra. It is not as if the deal with Russia would have left some of the idiots in Ukraine without any further scope for leverage between the EU and Russia.Beckow -> JCBKing , 24 October 2014 8:20pmI'm not sure if the EU will open up it's doors or conjure up some scheme that makes it more possible for a higher number of Ukrainians to at least be able to work in Poland, the supposedly "prosperous" Baltic states or Hungary.
Alderbaran -> Beckow, 24 October 2014 8:20pmEU is not exactly suffering from labor shortages today. So more Ukrainian workers, in Poland or anywhere, would just lead to even worse labor market for everybody. Actually, Russia is suffering from labor shortage, there are 3 million Ukrainians working there already.
In any negotiation one loses power and leverage by emotionally preferring one side. Ukraine has lost any leverage over EU by so visibly "loving EU", or US (who get anything they want anyway), or Russia by showing undisguised hatred - when Ukrainian leaders make Russo-phobic speeches (Yatsenyuk) and then remain as Ukrainian leaders, well that reflects on all Ukrainians.
So today, Ukraine has no room to negotiate anything. They are left with pleading for mercy and charity. That has never led to anything good.
The attempted takeover of eastern Ukraine has been way more violent and damaging than any of the protests in Kiev and I don't see how you can contest that.creel , 24 October 2014 8:03pmUkraine is a corrupt state but to imagine that this corruption would have gone away naturally following another election is naive. Generally I ignore posts that mention Nuland, Nazis and $5 billion but I feel compelled to disagree with you.
Months ago, many were comparing Putin's moves in Ukraine to a chess game being played masterfully. Now, many of the same voices are saying that Russia had no influence in Ukraine and that any problems there are the fault of the US.
The chess game analogy might be quite apt - Putin appears to see conflict as adversarial rather than a drive to find equilibrium and compromise. The drive to capture Crimea might have also been made in order to divert attention away from problems in Russia itself and I'm worried that he might become ever more paranoid as Russia's economy slips and that speeches such as this one might become a little more common.
Putin makes a general observation that is well grounded. Over the past two decades, yes. In his ex Soviet backyard. Yet if one thinks back further the US has often acted thus - through her proxy allies such as Turkey, Israel; through a host of coup-empowered autocrats the likes of Iraq's Saddam Hussein and Chile's Pinochet and through support for failed insurrection in Cuba, Nicaragua and indeed, after a long period of misrule, in Iran.Why do we so easily overlook Turkey's incursion into Cyprus and her continued support for militarized ethnic enclaves ..but pillory Russia for her support for similar dissident pro-Russian populations in Ukraine? Particularly when in Russia's case, there are sound strategic reasons for her apprehension about the way a potentially hostile linked-with-Nato military alliance has openly seized opportunity to place forces ever-closer to her heartland.
Umut Gezer , 24 October 2014 8:03pm
katafonia , 24 October 2014 8:07pmI still believe Russia should have invaded Ukraine after Yanukovich who was elected by the popular vote was ousted by a western backed coup. Perhaps this was what the Nato planned so Russia would be sucked into a war, but it did not work. their plans all have been dumped into the bin.
also, on the point of Putin ignoring one British paper's question; the British media has been lying for a year on the Ukraine issue. It has been publishing bias news and has been a dark page in journalism.
as Orwell said "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act."shakur_420 , 24 October 2014 8:12pm
the Russian Hercules made a great speech!Anyone familiar with the context and history of NATO expansion, and the facts surrounding the US-sponsored coup in Ukraine, knows full well that the Russians have shown tremendous restraint. It has been the US who has been aggressive (along with their pathetic allies, like my country) in Ukraine, as they have been on the global stage for more than half a century.SHappens , 24 October 2014 8:15pmThe Guardian's dismissal of the facts, and their downplaying of US government behaviour is nothing new.
Putin once again delivered an outstanding speech. He speaks the truth, in a straightforward manner, there is no malice nor hate. Just a fair understanding of the present situation and a clear view on Russia's future aspirations. Putin loves his country and his people rewards him a hundredfold.JCBKing , 24 October 2014 8:19pmThere is a lot of food for thoughts in his speech.
We have entered a period of differing interpretations and deliberate silences in world politics. International law has been forced to retreat over and over by the onslaught of legal nihilism. Objectivity and justice have been sacrificed on the altar of political expediency. Arbitrary interpretations and biased assessments have replaced legal norms. At the same time, total control of the global mass media has made it possible when desired to portray white as black and black as white.
Caught some of it. Brilliant stuff from a highly intelligent and decent man.zelazny , 24 October 2014 8:20pmIt is incredible though some of the dumb questions these morons in the US and UK press ask. Not all of them but many..it defies logic. One overemotional American woman asked a stupid series of questions of pointless rhetoric that leave no scope for decent answers. The Financial Times man even worse ( a misleading question with the answer obvious) with imbecilic rudeness and fake posturing over the "accuracy" of one his reporters latest propaganda pieces .Completely out of place to mention in a meeting like this with a head of state.
I also would have liked some question from any nationality on why the US,Russia and Ukraine are all involved in obfuscation of the MH17 crash. One would assume that all 3 parties know exactly what happened from where and when and it would have been good for the President to be cornered on this,even though a direct answer would have been unlikely to have been given...everything else though was answered as usual with a great degree of detail that shames the empty headed, 15 minutes at best, nonsense from the likes of Obama and Cameron.
Putin stands head and shoulders above the various western leaders, from the Pillsbury Doughboy Cameron to the "constitutional scholar" Obama.lubostron, 24 October 2014 8:28pmOnly the blind and the stupid don't understand that the US staged a neo-Nazi coup in Ukraine. The neo-Nazis then went on a campaign of slaughtering civilians, even burning them alive. The people in the eastern Ukraine said no to this psychopathy, and they in essence have won. The Kiev government trembles because it knows now that neither Nato nor the USA would come to their aid should Russia really attack them.
And a not so subtle threat underlies Putin's speech, because he basically has said Russia has had enough with US criminality. I think this foreshadows the eventually break from the petro-dollar by the BRICs, protected by Russia nuclear arms.
The federal reserve has to print out money by the untold billions in order to keep the US economy from another crash. Behind the facade of the increases in stock prices hides a cowering economy ready to crash at any unexpected event.
JJRichardson lubostron , 24 October 2014 8:30pm...And he's bloody right!
It's beyond tragi-comic belief the amount of psychophantic scaremongering, lies, half-truths and propaganda America, Britain and others use to demonise Russia.
Luckily, there seems to be a huge disconnect between what is told/reported by governments and official (corporate) media and what many, many people actually believe.
And have you looked at RT? It makes Soviet propaganda look sophisticated.Nickel07 -> JJRichardson , 24 October 2014 8:38pmI have looked at RT and I can assure you that some of the reporting is less biased than this pamphlet we are currently commenting on.AlekNevski, 24 October 2014 8:36pm
The Russian president "has won because we were not ready to die for Ukraine, while apparently he was," Ambassador Gerard Araud said yesterday at a Bloomberg Government breakfast in Washington.olddocrob, 24 October 2014 8:41pmhttp://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-22/-poker-player-putin-bluffed-and-won-french-envoy-says.html
Donetsk is 300 miles from Volgograd (Stalingrad) where 1 million (1 million?) German soldiers died in the legendary battle. Nearly 2 million Russian died too.
And these stupid bureaucrats are surprised that the Russians are willing to fight for... their land?This level of incompetence is hard to bear. Moronic, completely and utterly moronic.
donald7063 , 24 October 2014 8:47pmWas once told that the purpose of education was to equip one with a 100% efficient bullshit detector. There are a lot of sad, trusting folk on the site tonight; one would think uncle Jo, Adolph and their like had never trod the earth. How can anyone take seriously a man who parades half naked in front of his people looking like some extra from a homoerotic sword and saddles bash? I 'll take Putin seriously when he stops banging up journos and the singers of mildly ironic songs. Until then he's damaged goods.
Is Russia a colony of the US?Justavoice01 , 24 October 2014 9:04pmThis is the opening paragraph of the National Liberation Movement of Russia's manifesto which is for the removal of unfriendly domination by the US of its economic, governmental and constitutional arrangements. For the complete manifesto go to:
www.geopolitica.ru
The National Liberation Movement in Russia has only one goal that unites everyone regardless of their political views: the restoration of the sovereignty of the country and liberation from its occupiers. The inhabitants of Russia must break free from their chains of slavery and become free citizens in a free (non-occupied) country.
To achieve these goals, the government should become ours, i.e. we must completely change the nature of the state, including through amending the Constitution. Society is a broader concept, and in fact, it should feel necessary to partake in this goal because the national liberation struggle is a struggle of the society for the restoration of sovereign control over Russia, including control over state institutions. Today, the state in Russia, as in any colony, works for the occupier under the rules established by it, placing it under the rulers' direct control. This provision is captured in the existing Constitution. Every day the main task of those millions of officials who go to work is to improve living standards and the solve the problems of the American and European peoples. That is their main function today. At the level of daily activity, it is hard to recognize this without desire and sufficient time for the conceptualisation of our historical facts and the current state of affairs in the country as a whole.
Justthefactsman , 24 October 2014 9:06pmSince WWII, America has had plenty of wars, Committed plenty of war crimes, destabilized plenty of countries all over the world, not all for good, but for self-interest. Yet If Putin says this, it is labelled as propaganda, But it is true. America causes trouble everywhere it goes, if they don't get their way, the so called "west" defends any old stupidity they come out with. Creating chaos then try to manage it, but time and time again, it is botched up. Always defended by "compliant allies" who follows America with their follies all over the world. America has an army that don't win wars, it has too much money that is back by, god only knows, it's governance is irrational and dysfunctional, a country who votes in the dumbest individuals into positions of power and then try to dictate. I have said this plenty of time on these pages, Why do we follow them!......If the answer is WWII, the USSR won the European theatre practically by themselves.
I listened and watched on RT.johhnybgood , 24 October 2014 9:08pm"When the British reporter asked about Russian troops operating in the Ukraine, Putin did reply according to the English translation to which I was listening. he even admitted that Russian troops were used to prevent Ukranian troops from leaving there base.
Maybe Shaun Walker should have gone to Sochi, or perhaps have watched RT.
As to describe Putin as railing against the U.S.A I wonder if Shaun actually knows the definition of railing ?This whole piece is just another stick to beat the bear with.
I am not fan of Putin but then I am no fan of Obama, but can Shaun really tell us where Putin Lied about the historical past and what the recent history has been about the Ukraine?
I think Shaun should read "A Peoples Tragedy" by Orlando Fuges
As Sergei Lavrov said to the US "we are sorry our country is so close to your bases". Lavrov's recent UN speech is a masterclass in diplomatic rhetoric. He is a million miles ahead of any US spokesperson - they are all incapable of any sort of sensible dialogue. Is anyone now listening to the constant Russophobia from the MSM.? Look what is actually happening on the ground, not what the press is reporting. It is clear that Russia has been a model of self restraint in the face of many provocations. The West has only succeeded in driving Russia closer to China.RememberGiap , 24 October 2014 9:10pmAnd Putin is right . Putin's Russia does not send drones to kill on other continents . Putin's Russian did not cause chaos in Libya , Iraq and Afghanistan . Putin's Russia did not spend billions of dollars creating fundamentalist Islamic movements on the Pakistani / Afghan border in the 1980's . Putin's Russia did not invite and fund Arab Jihadists to wage war as proxies of Russia as did the USA , a price we all suffering now . Russia does not supply arms to Israel to bomb Palestinians . Russia does not give Israel its ' veto ' on the UN Security Council to give it immunity from International law . Russia does not station its military bases throughout the world . As for US activities in toppling Governments , destabilizing countries and covert operations in Southern and Central America I'd still be typing this post tomorrow without even then revealing the tip of the iceberg !!seamuspadraig , 24 October 2014 9:12pmThe USA , lovely people unfortunately living in a global Rogue State .
Uncle Scam is in deep doggie-do now. Russia and China aren't just some little third-world countries that Washington can wipe its ass on then throw away. Oh no... Uncle Scam is after big game now! These two animals can defend themselves. And this time, they're on the same team.Corrections , 24 October 2014 9:13pmI'm waiting to see what happens in Syria.
Partial English transcript:EugeneGur , 24 October 2014 9:33pm
http://eng.kremlin.ru/transcripts/23137The rest of the transcript will no doubt appear over the next several hours. I suppose it's better than waiting until the whole thing is translated before posting anything.
Putin said nothing in this speech that wasn't patently obvious. There is really nothing that could reasonably be denied because most statements were pure statement of facts. He just said all this very bluntly. He started his speech by saying that he was going to speak him mind, otherwise he sees no reason to speak at all.I am old enough to remember as in early 1990s the American press cried every day all the time "We won! We won! We are the sole remaining superpower!" I thought: Aren't we supposed to be all friends now? As it became clear very soon, no, we weren't. We were expected to be servants to "indispensable" American people destined to rule the Universe. I can't speak for the rest of the Universe, but that role somehow doesn't appeal to me.
This is a mistranslation. Puting didn't say anything about splendor. He did say "relax and enjoy" but he was referring to the saying" What should you do when you are being raped? Relax and try to enjoy". A somewhat different meaning, isn't it?The exceptionalism of the United States, the way they implement their leadership, is it really a benefit? And their worldwide intervention brings peace and stability, progress and peak of democracy? Maybe we should relax and enjoy this splendour? No!"
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2014 | Bloomberg
If President Vladimir Putin is Russia, as a senior Kremlin official said this week, then this country is angry, humiliated and suffering from an almost paranoid fixation on the U.S. as the root of all the world's troubles.
In a closing speech and question-and-answer session today at Russia's annual state-sponsored Valdai conference, Putin said he was going to be frank -- he was more than that. He dived into a long list of slights and wounds inflicted by the U.S. on Russia and the world since the end of the Cold War, and gave every sign of digging in for a long period of confrontation.
The U.S., according to Putin, is a global Big Brother that blackmails and bullies its allies while producing instability and misery around the world. Because the U.S. realizes it no longer has the ability to succeed as the lone hegemon in an age of rising powers, it is trying to recoup that status by re-creating the Cold War and producing a new enemy against which to rally countries, he said.
According to Putin's tour of contemporary world history, aggressive U.S. interventionism is responsible not just for the destabilization of Iraq (which it was) and Libya, but also for Syria (where the U.S. didn't intervene against President Bashar al-Assad) and the creation of al-Qaeda, the Taliban and Islamic State. And that's before you get to the Maidan protests and "state coup" this year in Ukraine.
As for the economic sanctions the European Union has imposed over Russia's annexation of Crimea and destabilization of Ukraine, that again was all because of pressure from the U.S., he said -- not any action Russia might have taken.
There is plenty of truth salted through Putin's complaints, enough to make him -- as one fawning Russian state TV anchor put it in what passed for a question -- "the face of resistance" for many around the world.
What is worrying is that the post 1990s narrative Putin laid out -- in which the U.S. has ignored, humiliated, encircled and isolated Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union -- is one most Russians whole-heartedly believe. They, too, can't imagine that ordinary unarmed citizens -- whether in Kiev, the Arab Spring countries or elsewhere -- might act of their own volition, rather than as pawns in a U.S. game.
"What's in his mind is what Russia is thinking. It's like you're mad at someone and just let it out," said Toby Gati, a former U.S. diplomat in the audience. Gati had told Putin she didn't recognize the U.S. he described, drawing a rare conciliatory comment that he wasn't seeking confrontation.
The wellspring of popular support Putin enjoys for any potential escalation, as unwise as that would be for Russia's long-term prosperity, allowed him to be defiant on sanctions and fatalistic on continued bloodshed in Ukraine.
Sure, Putin called for a new rule-based world order and insisted that his country had no ambitions to re-create the old empire. And no doubt he was talking, on state TV, in part to the home audience. Yet the broad thrust of his remarks was defiant, arguing that if the U.S. gets to throw its weight around and break rules, why shouldn't Russia? "What's allowed for Jupiter isn't for the bull," Putin said. "Well, the bull may not be able to, but the bear isn't going to ask anyone's permission."
There's plenty of blame to go around for allowing the situation to get this bad, but for anyone who wants to see the Ukraine crisis solved, sanctions lifted and a repaired relationship between Russia and the U.S. and EU, this was a dark and depressing performance that came close to a threat.
|
|
|
The Washington Post
Russian President Vladimir Putin accused the United States on Friday of endangering the international order by trying to "remake the whole world" for its own, exclusive interests, and he predicted that Ukraine would not be the last conflict to embroil the major powers.
Putin charged that the United States has escalated world conflicts by "unilateral diktat" and by imposing sanctions that he said were aimed at pushing Russia toward "economic weakness," while he denied that Russia aspires to rebuild an empire or reclaim its Cold War-era stature as a superpower.
"We did not start this," Putin said of the worsening world climate. "These policies started a few years ago; it hasn't just started today because of sanctions."
The Russian president's comments, among the most incendiary he has ever directed against the United States, were made during a speech before the Valdai Club, an annual gathering of international analysts and scholars held this year in the southern Russian city of Sochi, where Russia staged the Winter Olympic Games earlier this year.
Since then, Russia's annexation of Crimea and involvement in the conflict in eastern Ukraine have driven relations between Moscow and Washington to their lowest point since the end of the Cold War.
Putin said the United States had adopted a Cold War victor's mindset that was clouding its view of the world, leading to "serious delusions" about what changes are needed in the international system.
"It never ceases to amaze me how our partners have been guilty of making the same mistakes time and again," Putin said. He said past U.S. support for Islamist extremists had helped to create the current crises in Iraq and Syria, and he charged that U.S. backing for revolutions in former Soviet states now contending with chaos - such as Ukraine - were tantamount to "letting the genie out of the bottle."
magnifco1000
Trust me, if Putin weren't there, Russia would splinter into a dozen nations with half of them "Islamic States." They'd make ISIL look tame by comparison. Our interests are currently served with Russia under central control and with leadership that hate the Islamists as much as we do.
magnifco1000
The US approach to Russia is totally idiotic and unproductive. I'm a businessman and know Russia. These "Russian scholars" from Ivy League schools know nothing. Left over neocons from the Cold War just make things worse.
Russia should be engaged and worked with. We missed a golden opportunity when the Cold War ended. We don't have to feel afraid of Russia. It just has a conscript army and can barely hold it's territory together.
What's the sense of kicking them when they are down.
Giantsmax
from my own objective point of view, it is hard to argue with Putin, I think what he says bears a lot of truth.
Archy Bunka
It is hard to argue with Putin, because if you are a Russian citizen he will lock you up.
Giantsmax
But since I am an American citizen that is a moot point.
Beau7890
Of course the U.S. is trying to remake the whole world for its own interests. It's been doing this since the early 20th century. So has Russia. So has every other country that tries to lead the world-it's always for their own interests.
|
|
|
YouTube
Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and former Secretaries of State Condoleezza Rice and Madeleine Albright sit in conversation with former US Ambassador Nicholas Burns, professor at the Harvard Kennedy School.This discussion was part of the McCloskey Speaker Series and was hosted by the Aspen Institute in Aspen, Colorado on Friday, August 8, 2014.
For the West, the demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one. (c) Henry Kissinger.The collapse of the USA is coming closer. In my humble opinion these experts among others who are approaching this result.
Diplomacy - is saying "nice doggy!" until you find a rock. (c) Robert Gates.
This is diagnosis. Agony.
|
|
|
finance.yahoo.com
REUTERS/Vasily Maximov Russia's President Vladimir Putin chairs a meeting with members of the government at the Novo-Ogaryovo state residence outside Moscow.
What is going on in Vladimir Putin's mind?
That's the question a panel of Russia experts was trying to answer Tuesday morning. Attention on Russia and the crisis in Ukraine has dwindled as the press has focused more on the West's fight against the extremist group calling itself the Islamic State.
US Secretary of State John Kerry also announced Tuesday increased intelligence-gathering cooperation with Russia on the group - also known as ISIS - a particularly significant development given the recent thaw in US-Russia relations.
But this panel, which was moderated by Reuters, took a much more alarmist tone when speaking about America's relations with Moscow and speculating about Putin. All the experts in attendance warned that Putin's recent moves in Ukraine might only be the start of new territorial ambitions.
Three of the four panelists - New Yorker editor David Remnick, journalist and author Masha Gessen, Russian political activist and former grand chessmaster Garry Kasparov, and former Treasury Department official Roger Altman - agreed Putin could soon try to stretch his influence into the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
"They already are under pressure," Gessen, the author of a 2012 unauthorized biography of Putin, said of the Baltics. "That's very much where he's doing his nuclear saber-rattling, and that's where he's planning to call NATO's bluff."
Unlike Ukraine, all three Baltic states are NATO members. NATO's Article 5 requires all members of the alliance come to the defense of any member that is attacked or targeted.
Putin last month made casual mention of his country's nuclear arsenal, around the same time NATO accused Russian forces of an "incursion" in Ukraine. Many analysts have speculated Putin's next move could come in the Baltic states, something that would be a clear challenge to NATO.
Amid the bluster from Putin - who also reportedly said in a private conversation he could invade Poland, Romania, and the Baltic states if he really wanted to - NATO states made a point of countering with strong rhetoric of their own.
President Barack Obama traveled to Estonia last month on the way to a meeting in Wales with other NATO states, in a trip the White House said was aimed at reassuring NATO allies in the Baltics that felt threatened by Putin's moves in Ukraine. The message, a White House adviser said, was for Putin to "not even think about messing around" with the region.
But members of the panel were skeptical the US and other European members would rush to the Baltics' defense if they were targeted. And they said Putin would love a chance to try to embarrass NATO and paint it as nothing more than a symbolic alliance.
Kasparov speculated Putin may try to push NATO by employing some of the same tactics he used in Crimea, which Russia formally annexed from Ukraine in March. He said that, rather than marching across the border, Russia would try to stir up some pro-Moscow "form of dissent" in the Baltics. This would allow Russia to maintain plausible deniability and characterize any military action in the region as a reaction - something that would make it difficult for NATO members to call it an invasion.
Remnick agreed a potential Putin playbook for the Baltics would resemble Crimea. He added that a potential Putin push into the region wouldn't resemble "Czechoslovakia in 1968," when the Soviet Union lined up tanks and invaded the country to crack down on reformist trends.
"There's a rich tradition of these highly crude, sophisticated provocations," Remnick said. "It's not going to look like Czechoslovakia in 1968. Thousands of tanks are not going to cross into [the Baltics]. The operation in Crimea, on a military intelligence basis, was brilliant. Brilliant."
What may be most disconcerting about Putin in general, however, is his lack of predictability. All of the panelists agreed on one thing: Putin's end goal is to stay in power. And if that goal is suddenly best furthered through making noise in the Baltics, then there's a very real possibility he'll take action.
"We're talking about a man who doesn't have a plan. So we're trying to figure out what his plan is, but he doesn't have one," Gessen said. "He sees that as an option. It is definitely an option, he is considering it, and he may wake up one morning and do it."
|
|
|
September 3, 2014 | consortiumnews.com
Given the very high stakes of a nuclear confrontation with Russia, some analysts wonder what's the real motive for taking this extraordinary risk over Ukraine. Is it about natural gas, protection of the U.S. dollar's dominance, or an outgrowth of neocon extremism, asks Robert Parry.
A senior U.S. diplomat told me recently that if Russia were to occupy all of Ukraine and even neighboring Belarus that there would be zero impact on U.S. national interests. The diplomat wasn't advocating that, of course, but was noting the curious reality that Official Washington's current war hysteria over Ukraine doesn't connect to genuine security concerns.
So why has so much of the Washington Establishment – from prominent government officials to all the major media pundits – devoted so much time this past year to pounding their chests over the need to confront Russia regarding Ukraine? Who is benefiting from this eminently avoidable – yet extremely dangerous – crisis? What's driving the madness?
Of course, Washington's conventional wisdom is that America only wants "democracy" for the people of Ukraine and that Russian President Vladimir Putin provoked this confrontation as part of an imperialist design to reclaim Russian territory lost during the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991. But that "group think" doesn't withstand examination. [See Consortiumnews.com's "Who's Telling the Big Lie on Ukraine?"]
The Ukraine crisis was provoked not by Putin but by a combination of the European Union's reckless move to expand its influence eastward and the machinations of U.S. neoconservatives who were angered by Putin's collaboration with President Barack Obama to tamp down confrontations in Syria and Iran, two neocon targets for "regime change."
Plus, if "democracy promotion" were the real motive, there were obviously better ways to achieve it. Democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych pledged on Feb. 21 – in an agreement guaranteed by three European nations – to surrender much of his power and hold early elections so he could be voted out of office if the people wanted.
However, on Feb. 22, the agreement was brushed aside as neo-Nazi militias stormed presidential buildings and forced Yanukovych and other officials to flee for their lives. Rather than stand behind the Feb. 21 arrangement, the U.S. State Department quickly endorsed the coup regime that emerged as "legitimate" and the mainstream U.S. press dutifully demonized Yanukovych by noting, for instance, that a house being built for him had a pricy sauna.
The key role of the neo-Nazis, who were given several ministries in recognition of their importance to the putsch, was studiously ignored or immediately forgotten by all the big U.S. news outlets. [See Consortiumnews.com's "Ukraine's 'Dr. Strangelove' Reality."]
So, it's hard for any rational person to swallow the official line that the U.S. interest in the spiraling catastrophe of Ukraine, now including thousands of ethnic Russians killed by the coup regime's brutal "anti-terrorist operation," was either to stop Putin's imperial designs or to bring "democracy" to the Ukrainians.
... ... ...
The Neocons' 'Samson Option'
So, while it's reasonable to see multiple motives behind the brinksmanship with Russia over Ukraine, the sheer recklessness of the confrontation has, to me, the feel of an ideology or an "ism," where people are ready to risk it all for some larger vision that is central to their being.
That is why I have long considered the Ukraine crisis to be an outgrowth of the neoconservative obsession with Israel's interests in the Middle East.
Not only did key neocons – the likes of Assistant Secretary Nuland and Sen. John McCain – put themselves at the center of the coup plotting last winter but the neocons had an overriding motive: they wanted to destroy the behind-the-scenes collaboration between President Obama and President Putin who had worked together to avert a U.S. bombing campaign against the Syrian government a year ago and then advanced negotiations with Iran over limiting but not eliminating its nuclear program.
Those Obama-Putin diplomatic initiatives frustrated the desires of Israeli officials and the neocons to engineer "regime change" in those two countries. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu even believed that bombing Iran's nuclear plants was an "existential" necessity.
Further, there was the possibility that an expansion of the Obama-Putin cooperation could have supplanted Israel's powerful position as a key arbiter of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Thus, the Obama-Putin relationship had to be blown up – and the Ukraine crisis was the perfect explosive for the destruction. [See Consortiumnews.com's "Why Neocons Seek to Destabilize Russia."]
Though I'm told that Obama now understands how the neocons and other hardliners outmaneuvered him over Ukraine, he has felt compelled to join in Official Washington's endless Putin-bashing, causing a furious Putin to make clear that he cannot be counted on to assist Obama on tricky foreign policy predicaments like Syria and Iran.
As I wrote last April, "There is a 'little-old-lady-who-swallowed-the-fly' quality to neocon thinking. When one of their schemes goes bad, they simply move to a bigger, more dangerous scheme. If the Palestinians and Lebanon's Hezbollah persist in annoying you and troubling Israel, you target their sponsors with 'regime change' – in Iraq, Syria and Iran. If your 'regime change' in Iraq goes badly, you escalate the subversion of Syria and the bankrupting of Iran.
"Just when you think you've cornered President Barack Obama into a massive bombing campaign against Syria – with a possible follow-on war against Iran – Putin steps in to give Obama a peaceful path out, getting Syria to surrender its chemical weapons and Iran to agree to constraints on its nuclear program. So, this Obama-Putin collaboration has become your new threat. That means you take aim at Ukraine, knowing its sensitivity to Russia.
"You support an uprising against elected President Viktor Yanukovych, even though neo-Nazi militias are needed to accomplish the actual coup. You get the U.S. State Department to immediately recognize the coup regime although it disenfranchises many people of eastern and southern Ukraine, where Yanukovych had his political base.
"When Putin steps in to protect the interests of those ethnic Russian populations and supports the secession of Crimea (endorsed by 96 percent of voters in a hastily called referendum), your target shifts again. Though you've succeeded in your plan to drive a wedge between Obama and Putin, Putin's resistance to your Ukraine plans makes him the next focus of 'regime change.'
"Your many friends in the mainstream U.S. news media begin to relentlessly demonize Putin with a propaganda barrage that would do a totalitarian state proud. The anti-Putin 'group think' is near total and any accusation – regardless of the absence of facts – is fine."
Yet, by risking a potential nuclear confrontation with Russia - the equivalent of the old lady swallowing a horse – the neocons have moved beyond what can be described in a children's ditty. It has become more like a global version of Israel's "Samson Option," the readiness to use nuclear weapons in a self-destructive commitment to eliminate your enemies whatever the cost to yourself.
But what is particularly shocking in this case is how virtually everyone in U.S. officialdom – and across the mainstream media spectrum – has bought into this madness.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). For a limited time, you also can order Robert Parry's trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America's Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here.
|
|
|
May 15, 2014 | thejubilee.wordpress.com
Ukraine remains the topic of most discussions on global economy, and Russian president Vladimir Putin is an inevitable part of that subject. Although he is almost universally demonized by western leaders and media, more impartial observers increasingly concede that his administration's conduct seems more rational and more constructive than that of his western counterparts. But even then, most people pad their comments with a kind of disclaimer:
- I don't like Putin, but…
- Putin s a thug, but…
- Whatever you may think of Putin, …
Recently I came across an article about him written by Sharon Tennison – an American who has worked in Russia (and USSR) for 30 years as a developer of programs to open up relations between Russia and the USA. Tennison has had personal experiences with Putin and has over the years known a "numerous American officials and US businessmen who have had years of experience working with him…" "None," she writes, "would describe him as 'brual,' or 'thuggish,' or other slanderous adjectives and nouns that are repeatedly used in western media." Here are a few excerpts from her article [1]:
I met Putin years before he ever dreamed of being president of Russia, as did many of us working in St.Petersburg during the 1990s. … For years I had been creating programs to open up relations between the two countries … A new program possibility emerged in my head. Since I expected it might require a signature from the Marienskii City Hall, an appointment was made. My friend Volodya Shestakov and I showed up at a side door entrance to the Marienskii building. We found ourselves in a small, dull brown office, facing a rather trim nondescript man in a brown suit. He inquired about my reason for coming in. After scanning the proposal I provided he began asking intelligent questions. After each of my answers, he asked the next relevant question. I became aware that this interviewer was different from other Soviet bureaucrats who always seemed to fall into chummy conversations with foreigners with hopes of obtaining bribes in exchange for the Americans' requests… This bureaucrat was open, inquiring, and impersonal in demeanor. After more than an hour of careful questions and answers, he quietly explained that he had tried hard to determine if the proposal was legal, then said that unfortunately at the time it was not. A few good words about the proposal were uttered. That was all. He simply and kindly showed us to the door. Out on the sidewalk, I said to my colleague, "Volodya, this is the first time we have ever dealt with a Soviet bureaucrat who didn't ask us for a trip to the US or something valuable!" I remember looking at his business card in the sunlight––it read Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin
I must confess, Tennison's article surprised me a bit: Putin stood up to schoolyard bullies; Putin went to the KGB for similar reasons why many young Americans joined the US Army after September 11 attacks; Putin takes no bribes; Putin was curteous and helpful as a public official; Putin turned down privileged treatment for his wife after her car accident… If this came from Russian sources, I would probably dismiss it as political PR.
But Tennison is an American and a relatively anonymous American at that. Her article wasn't circulated widely or cited by Voice of Russia or RT, so it seems genuine. That begs the question: what if Putin is actually a decent man who simply wants to run Russia for the benefit of the Russian people as best as he can? I sincerely wish that Tennison's version reflects the true Putin – such a man would be less likely to invade Europe and escalate the present conflict over Ukraine to a new World War.
At any rate, making him into a brutal thug in the eyes of the western public wouldn't be the first bill of goods we'd been sold by the leaders of the free world. As Lord Nordcliffe put it in the run-up to World War I, "To create an atmosphere for war, you have to introduce in the populace the hatred of 'the other'." If such hatred must be based on lies, we would do well to reject it.
Mark, June 6, 2014 at 11:09 am
I worked in the archive at an international advertising agency for many years. I spent most of my days reading through marketing strategies and advertising/marketing/media journals from around the world. In the early 90′s the latest buzz in adworld was "globalisation". No, they weren't referring to the NWO. Globalisation in the ad industry spoke in terms of corporate identity becoming consistent at every brand/consumer interface around the world. There was talk of big brands aligning with one global agency to achieve this. However there were also predictions that in a few years time all media outlets across TV, radio, print, outdoor and internet would be owned by a handful of companies. Today 90% of global media is owned by 6 companies, and they all speak with one voice.
In 1994 i never thought of media companies as "news media". They were just another platform to promote goods and services. It was only after 911 when I had my light-bulb moment. The bullshit these people were peddling was so obvious. It was as if the news scripts were written by the state department. And ever since then I know immediately when they are lying. Actually, to be honest. I initially bought into the Obama mania. So yeah…they managed to fool me again.
The lightbulb moment was life changing event because from that moment all my favorite movies and the hero's i admired were suddenly deduced to nothing but propaganda. James Bond taking on the bad USSR was a load of shit.
I enjoyed your article. I've admired Putin for a long time. The demonizing campaign was done to Ahmadinejad, Gadaffi, Mugabe and countless others. I wish people would actually read the transcripts of what these men actually have to say at UN General Assembly meets.
Lisa, June 6, 2014 at 1:21 pm
I found it shocking the way American media portrayed the Russian people and Pres. Putin during the opening of the Olympics this year. I thought to myself this is the opposite of what the Olympics are supposed to be about.
It was clearly a propaganda machine designed to put the American people against Pres. Putin and Russia. It's like they were bringing the cold world back into this timeline on purpose. And it hasn't stopped, I don't even have cable TV and I can't get away from it. My first thought was why? It was ridiculous how much time they spent on the bathroom incident.
It really showed the maturity of the American media, comparable to bullying kids in the schoolyard. Thank you for this well-written article. I wish people would think for themselves instead of letting media dictate reality. And for those people who are guaranteed to slam me with insults for writing this, or call me unpatriotic, it's not true I love my country. I but I don't love how media, lies to us every single day and tells us what our values are, what is true and what is not true. But as always, if you really want the truth follow the money, follow the power, and the motives will be there as clear as the nose on your face.
Google matched content |
Society
Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers : Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy
Quotes
War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes : Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce : Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes
Bulletin:
Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law
History:
Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds : Larry Wall : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS : Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development : Scripting Languages : Perl history : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history
Classic books:
The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month : How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite
Most popular humor pages:
Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor
The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D
Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
|
|
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site |
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.
Last modified: March, 12, 2019
