May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Bigger doesn't imply better. Bigger often is a sign of obesity, of lost control, of overcomplexity, of cancerous
NeoMcCartyism as a smoke screen to hide the crisis of neoliberalism
Election of Trump is the sign of crisis of neoliberal ideology and decadence of US elite; warmongering neocon Hillary was the
establishment candidate that was rejected by votes and which represented a grave threat to the US national security
A case study of state-fuelled paranoia designed to provide a smoke screen over crisis of neoliberalism in the USA which led
to Trump victory.
It is impossible to overstate the stakes involved in the latest controversy over Russia. They involve trillions of dollars
in warfare largess to the tens of thousands of bureaucratic warfare-state parasites who are sucking the lifeblood out of the American
"Trump is somewhat less thrilled with tilting with Russia for the American empire which is as moral as Nero's
And that annoys neocons, including a part of CIA, Pentagon, and a large part of State Department. Dumping Kristol's PNAC crowd
will definitely strengthen the republic. But it is not an easy teas as all those national security parasites are well entrenched
in Washington, DC. The classic question is "Who, whom ?" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who,_whom%3F
"... The American public is now experiencing mass paranoia that is called Russia-gate. Obnoxious and dangerous as this officially encouraged madness may be, it is, alas, nothing new. As from 9/11, the same kind of group hypnosis was administered from the Nation's Capital on the body politic to serve the then agenda of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, turning back civil liberties that had accrued over generations without so much as a whimper from Congress, our political elites and the country at large. ..."
Looking at the Integrity Initiative it's clear that information warfare at all levels - academia, the media, on down to the
little subsidized web sites and right on down to the individuals who are paid to insert comments on social media -- is now regarded
in England as an integral part of Intelligence work. The same is even more true about the USA, were on Russiagate all
neoliberal MSM sing in unison, using intelligence agencies talking points. The result is almost complete brainwashing which
was can observe even among academic blogs such as Angry Bear. As well the complete
absence of any critical thinking not only among ordinary people (who are busy with their lives) but also among politicians. This nuance was brilliantly
caught in the following satire
Russians halt search for
intelligent life in Washington OffGuardian :
Russian research team which claimed to have detected signs of intelligent life in Washington has now discovered the
life there not to be quite so intelligent after all.
A Russian spokesman, who wishes to remain anonymous, told our
Moscow science correspondent —who also wishes to remain anonymous— that the Washington atmosphere has been poisoned
by huge clouds of putrid hot air belching from the corporate media. He explained that such a hostile environment
makes it almost impossible for intelligent life to survive, let alone evolve a sustainable culture. The Russian team
believes there may still be small pockets of intelligent life elsewhere on the North American continent but without
the necessary conditions they need to thrive they are destined to disappear without trace.
Speaking off the record, the Russian spokesman, who asked us not to disclose his identity, added that hopes of
finding intelligent life in London, Paris, Berlin and other Western European locations, where it might be expected to
flourish, are fading fast. Though it is believed intelligent life once existed in Occiental Europe, an atmosphere
suitable for the maintenance of such life has all but evaporated.
On both the North American and West European
continents bodies spewing vast amounts highly toxic material are believed to be responsible for a huge decline in
While there might be better labels, we will call this new Anti-Russian hysteria neo-McCarthyism, because it is pretty diligent
replication of "Red Scare" (which BTW lasted a decade) in which Communist agents are replaced with "Russian agents" who are
This new McCarthyism-style campaign against Russia also reflects the depth of the crisis of neoliberalism in the USA. A strong and confident ruling
class welcomes criticism and is ready to brush it all off with a smile and a shrug.
This new McCarthyism-style campaign against Russia also reflects the depth of the crisis of neoliberalism in the USA. A strong and confident ruling
class welcomes criticism and is ready to brush it all off with a smile and a shrug.
When they start pretending that
the growing level of dissent is the work of "foreign enemies", well, this is a sign of decadence of elite and profound weakness of neoliberal
ideology. As Professor Cohen noted this is a real threat to the USA national security:
This is unprecedented, preposterous, and dangerous, potentially more so than even Joe
McCarthy's search for "Communist" connections. It would suggest, for example, that scores of
American corporations doing business in Russia today are engaged in criminal enterprise.
More to the point, advisers to U.S. policy-makers and even media commentators on Russia must
have many and various contacts with Russia if they are to understand anything about the
dynamics of Kremlin policy-making. I myself, to take an individual example, was an adviser to
two (unsuccessful) presidential campaigns, which considered my wide-ranging and longstanding
"contacts" with Russia to be an important credential, as did the one sitting president whom I
To suggest that such contacts are in any way criminal is to slur hundreds of reputations and
to leave U.S. policy-makers with advisers laden with ideology and no actual expertise. It is
also to suggest that any quest for better relations with Russia, or détente, is somehow
suspicious, illegitimate, or impossible, as expressed recently by Andrew Weiss in The
Wall Street Journal and by The Washington Post , in an editorial . This is one reason why I have, in a
previous commentary , argued that Russia-gate and its promoters have become the gravest
threat to American national security.
While this is a favorite policy of the current US neoliberal elite (and first of all "Lords of secrecy" -- the top brass of the intelligence
agencies) it might well be a symptom of the USA society getting a dangerous political auto-immune disease which is much more
widespread and is as difficult if not more difficult to cure (abnormal immune response to a normal body substance; ~24 million of
people are affected in the USA; examples include psoriasis,
diabetes mellitus type 1, and
rheumatoid arthritis ).
Russiagate might well be a symptom of the USA society getting a dangerous political
In other words this is the sign that the US elite is losing the battle of ideas can't find solutions to the US internal problems
caused by neoliberalism, and first of all drop of the standard of living of both lower middle class and blue collar workers. So they
start to suppress any criticism framing opponents or even people whom they view not suitable stewards of the USA-led global
neoliberal empire (Trump) as Russian agents or stooges.
All that really
stands between the correct discredited after 2008 neoliberal elite and a social revolution is a thin veneer of 'legitimacy' and status (as well as 18 intelligence agencies
;-), and that's
really not enough anymore. Hillary was defeated despite being the establishment candidate supported by intelligence
agencies (which suppressed Emailgate scandal) and that put
the USA neoliberal elite into the state of paranoia. So fueling Neo-McCarthyism was a defensive move, that allowed to shift the focus
of discontent on the "external enemy"
(aka scapegoat) and rally
the nation under the flag.
Samuel Johnson saying "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. " can be modified to "McCarthyism is the last refuge
of a scoundrel."
That why the Russian threat argument is not only popular, but became the main "theme" within the MSM and the American political
establishment. This witch hunt is encouraged by foreign governments who, for reasons of self-interest, want to see Washington
embroiled in the confrontation (Great Britain were Russophobia runs in generations of the elite, Israel as well as Polish, Baltic and Ukrainian
governments comes to mind). The result is the construction
of the new peril, a process similar to re-construction (actually more realistic, as technology of propaganda improved since 50th) of
Red Menace. As Reds are gone this is sold as ethnic menace which represents politically correct version of Anti-Semitism.
As ex-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said
Clapper’s Unhinged Russia-Bashing – Consortiumnews
The Russians are “typically, almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever”
There’s great irony in that comment by Clapper, with his own record of
perjury, is the implication that an entire nations, entire ethnicity can’t be trusted. And, of course, there were no widespread outrage followed this blatantly
xenophobic comment in neoliberal MSM.
This process of demonizing the enemy was previously used only during wars and it has its own logic and rules. It include
morel indignation as a component. The proper sociological term is "moral panic":
A moral panic is a feeling of fear spread among a large number of people that some evil threatens the well-being of
society. A Dictionary of Sociology defines a moral panic as "the process of arousing social concern over an
issue – usually the work of moral entrepreneurs and the mass media".
In recent centuries the mass media have become important players in the dissemination of moral indignation, even
when they do not appear to be consciously engaged in sensationalism or in muckraking. Simply reporting the facts can
be enough to generate concern, anxiety, or panic. Stanley Cohen states that moral panic happens when "a condition,
episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests".
Examples of moral panic include the belief in widespread abduction of children by predatory paedophiles, belief in
ritual abuse of women and children by satanic cults, the War on Drugs, and other public-health issues. issue can be
fake such as in witch hunts.
... ... ...
According to Stanley Cohen, who seems to have borrowed the term from Marshall McLuhan (see above), there are
five key stages in the construction of a moral panic:
Someone, something or a group are defined as a threat to social norms or community interests
The threat is then depicted in a simple and recognizable symbol/form by the media
The portrayal of this symbol rouses public concern
There is a response from authorities and policy makers
The moral panic over the issue results in social changes within the community
In current language, "witch-hunt" is used instead of the term of "moral panic" in case the issue is fake. It
means an investigation usually conducted with much publicity, supposedly to uncover subversive activity, disloyalty and so on, but
in reality designed to weaken political opposition. McCarthyism is a less widespread and more narrow term which means the practice
of making accusations of subversion or treason without proper regard for evidence
Red Scare was actually greatly beneficial
to the USA in 50th. Also it was
clear that the threat was fake as after WWII Bolshevism as a social model did not represented a real threat to capitalism (it
degenerated into an extreme variant of state capitalism; in other word Bolshevism represented threat mainly to their own people).
It is important to understand that the fear
of the USSR prevented looting of the USA middle class till 1980th. In other words, the mere existence of the USSR on the world scene suppressed
cannibalistic instinct of the US elite for more than a half the century. In this sense the USSR was co-author of the "golden
age" of the USA (approx 1945-1970; until hippies culture took over), where the stereotypical "American Dream" was brought to
The fear of the USSR prevented looting of middle class till 1980th. In other words, the mere existence of the USSR on the world scene suppressed
cannibalistic instinct of the US elite for more than a half the century (1917-1970).
That why the post-war period as a the real gold-age period
for the US middle class an population in general. Cannibalistic instincts of the US elite returned only after the collapse
of the USSR. Fueled by ascendance of neoliberalism.
The analogy of "Russiagate" with McCarthy witch hunt is very strong indeed but is incomplete. Here in addition to the attempt to
crush the opposition to neoliberal globalization painting group of politicians opposing neoliberal globalization as Russian stooges
there was a distict effort to suppress disappointment with neoliberalism by rallying
that nation around the flag.
There is a distinct smell of color revolution against President Trump in Russiagate. There are several facts which
suggest that employees of CIA, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), sympathetic to the neoliberal/globalist
wing of Democrat Party (Clinton wing), used the power of their offices and (with the assistance of foreign nationals) tried to influence
the 2016 election in favor of Hillary Clinton, first to exonerate her and then obtain information to prevent the election of Donald
Trump, to collect "insurance" -- compromising materials on him in case he win, and after his surprise win, to provide a basis
for his impeachment and removal from the Office by forcing on his administration the Special Prosecutor.
Like in any color revolution the hysteria in MSM plays very important role in demonizing Russian and by extension the current administration.
Similar to "Red Menace" witch hunt opposing to neoliberalism ideas are perceived as a cancer spreading around the globe, undermining
the legitimacy of Western values and political systems. That's why we see frantic attempt to raise anti-Russian sentiments in
the USA to this level of nation-wide paranoia ("Russians under every bed" level) too. To fake it as the "battle of ideas (BTW
Russia is just another neoliberal state; it just wants to be less dependent for Washington, not a pitiful vassal like Western Europeans
countries) and make it "strategic" confrontation.
Russian policies are distorted to the level which make them a caricature completely
detached from the reality. And the assumption the the US President can unilaterally change the USA foreign policy actually is
an insult to intelligence. Trump is definitely a marionette as appointment of Bolton and Pompeo (and before them Haley) proved once and
Under the cover of this hysteria Washington is trying to adopt a long term diplomatic and military strategy of containing Russia;
to forge new alliances which might slow down or prevent ascendance of the economic block of Russia and China (with Iran, turkey and
India as possible members). And like in in Orwell 1984 novel to prepare the American people for a never ending struggle of "good
The problem with the
USA neoliberal elite and neoliberal MSM is that the last thing US neoliberals are interested in is how the world outside the
bubble of "full spectrum dominance" they inhabit after 1980 operates, and their absolutely contempt for 'deplorables', be they
Russian, British, Arab or American. This can lead to political misjudgments like invasion of Libya, and support of jihadists to
The whole situation with Russia, including but not limited her economy, history, military, culture etc., is not known to those
people. And this represent a strong empirical evidence of a complete professional inadequacy of most people populating this
neoliberal/neocon "full spectrum dominance" bubble. Which makes them a bunch of seedy, squalid bastards selling the security of the
USA and balancing on the edge of nuclear war for 20 silver coins for themselves and their families. Many of the them
look like (and most probably are) little men, drunkards, henpecked husbands, or civil servants playing cowboys and Indians to
brighten their rotten little lives or present to be a strong men in the eyes of their mistresses.
Do you think they sit
like monks balancing right against wrong in such tricky subject as relations with Russia ? No. Their approach is simplistic and
wrong "Russia is an autocratic state" they declare without of any evidence (any state with powerful intelligence agencies
is autocratic by definition; any veneer of democracy is such a state is fake) ; so "Carnage should be destroyed."
And they are playing this game for their petty and
selfish motive. Steele dossier attests that in the USA there is a fully formed and influences caste of "national security
parasites.", the caste of 'Praetorian guards' which consists of officials in intelligencia agencies and State Department, most
of which are neocons hell bent of "Full spectrum dominance" mantra, the wellbeing of common people in the USA be
damned. This caste is deeply interested in keeping the heat of Russiagate as it brings them money (as in Pentagon
almost trillion dollars budget), influence as well as
personal security in their lucrative positions in 17 intelligence agencies, State Department. So this tiny section of the USA
elite essential had taken the US hostage. And they control all major US papers, TV channels and websites (see
US and British media are servants of security
All at the expense of security of the
USA as a country, as it requires balancing of the edge of WWIII to secure funds from the buidget.
The US and British neoliberal MSM now have fallen below any journalistic standard. It is prudent to view them as evil propaganda
tools used by rogue elements in the US and British intelligence agencies. They do not have their own opinions. Puppets. All of
them. And as somebody aptly said those overzealous "journalists" like Rachel MadCow or "analysts" like Max Boot
who as Tucker Carlson suggested "should be demoted
to painting houses, instead of painting Russia black".
And as far as I cal tell most of those people are badly educated by European standards (I am not talking about worthless formal
degrees they hold). They are deeply provincial, and often clueless Mayberry Machiavellians. This group of ruthless careerists actually enjoy their "confirmation
bias" toward Russia (which to me is a modern form of anti-Semitism, displacement of hatred to Jews if you wish, which is so common
among Irish Catholics ;-). In a simple human terms I would call them ignorant snobs. That is why this neoliberal
academic-political-media "environment" prefers openly anti-Russian "sources" because those "sources"
regurgitate to them what they
want to hear to start with. Thus is classic "Chalabi Moment" reproduced with a quite different, nuclear armed country and as such
much more dangerous. Generally Russiagate remind more dangerous variant of Iraq WMD with Brennan with Steele dossier
instead of Secretary Colin Powell in UN presenting "irrefutable" proof. And with Rachel Maddow instead of
In case of Iraq it was and still is a tragedy (that cost life of million or more of Iraqis), but at least the world is
relatively safe. With Russia, as I stated many times for years -- they simply have no idea what they are dealing with. Those guys
know how to fight. But they are briefed by "sources" such as Russian fugitives in London (who buy this way their non-extradition to
Russia for their crimes) and are happy to get the confirmation of their biases. Also they have information from fringe urban
Russian fifth column, especially feminists and lesbians (Masha Gessen is a good example here; although even she has now reservations
Again, the level of "Russian Studies" in the Anglophone world in general and in the USA in particular is appalling. And this
dismal level represents a "clear and present danger" since removes or misinterprets crucial information about the only
nation in the world which can completely annihilate the USA. And dramatically increases the danger of a disastrous military
confrontation which can easily slide into full scale nuclear war. they are constantly baiting and humiliating Russia, which so far
(to be fare to Putin) did not bite the bait. But a more stupid and more nationalistic person can come to power after Putin, kind of
Russian Trump. And then what ?
I would say that US military brass on average is much better aware of Russia and not only in purely military terms. Current
trends in the USA foreign policy (and they are not new) are so worrisome that, paradoxically, the US military are my only hope.
Some notes on history of the present Neo-McCarthysim compaign
The key reason for this propaganda campaign is that Putin stance on international relations (multi-polar world) is in conflict
that neoliberals/neocons idea of the USA full spectrum domination. Also the alliance of China and Russia represents
geo-political thereat to the neoliberal empire led by USA. And Russia is a weaker link is this fledging alliance with stronger and
more numerous fifth column (which in China is much weaker outside Hong Cong). Also Russia is less nationalistic then China and has
traditionally strong pro-Europeian faction of the elite which can be used as the fifth column. So logically this is a country which
can be attached first.
Subduing, of better, dismembering of Russia, also cuts an important source of hydrocarbons to China and fully encircles China.
And the idea to appropriate Russian hydrocarbons was the idea fix of the Us neoliberal elite since Clinton. And during
"Drunken Yeltsin" presidency they almost succeeded (Khodorkovsky was on the wedge of selling his holdings to the USA when he was
arrested), but them this success was partially reversed with the ascendance of Putin. So this McCarthyism campaign and Putin
demonization has a stamp on it "Nothing personal, only business."
The problem with such a policy which is consistent for all administration starting with Bush II (probably the first in a long
string of former CIA operatives who became the USA presidents) is that Russia is a nuclear armed state and such tactics literally
means balancing on the edge of nuclear war.
The campaign started in late 2013 and early 2014 around the time of Sochi Olympics. After Maydan color revolution in Ukraine Russia was hit with
sanctions for not obeying Washington dictat and geo-political interests. But that was only a start. At this time full scale campaign
for demonization of President Putin and successfully associating him with the word "thug" started . In three year this
campaign brought pretty amazing result: over 80% of population is now completely brainwashed and view Putin as evil
kleptocrat, who should be deposed by all means possible. While in reality he is just a very moderate Russian nationalist and
pretty talented and reserved politician who avoids open confrontation with the USA despite constant and un-relenting bating.
This demonization of Putin is one of the most visible successes of neo-McCarthyism campaign in the USA and GB (to lesser extent in
France and Germany, as well)
The third wave which reached really hysterical pitch started with the election of Trump as "insurance policy" to prevent his
cabinet from implementing any measure that can hurt neoliberal globalization and neocon foreign policy.
They are constantly developing new containment policies,
new doctrines. The side effect of all this frantic activities is feeding of MIC as well as a group of people, who we call "national
security parasites". This new cadre of Russophobes are recruited mostly from neocons ( "dirty scoundrels of Washington"
) and neoliberal (Clinton) wing of Democratic Party. There is also a large strata of politicians, who more than willing to exploit
this opportunity to feed military industrial complex, such as Senator McCain. In any case they now constitute the dominant faction
of the US elite and dominate the USA foreign policy. So this is another iteration of "Carnage needs to be destroyed" hysteria
with a specific for Washington set of cheerleaders and "experts."
Since around late November 2017 there is some oppostion to this neo-McCarthyism wave. Opposition is much weaker and
compaign still proceed at full speed, but certain elements of Republican Party now oppose this witch hunt, if for purely partisan reasons. And
that was clearly demonstrated by recent hearings of the Capitol Hill, especially Rosenstein testimony before House Judiciary
Committee called over concern about possible bias of Mueller investigation (surprise, surprise).
Who was behind ne "Red Perl" hysteria
The central role in the creation of the new "Red peril" is played by US intelligence agencies. They word using time tested
patterns of war propaganda. Demonization of the enemy is the task number one in this game. The fueling of this hysteria
usually starts with mysterious "sources" and unnamed "intelligence officials" who leak information, float trial balloons, and warn about
the coming threat. Their information is then augmented by colorful intelligence reports that finger exotic cybersecurity threats and
retired CIA brass like Michael Morell,
John O. Brennan, supported by several other figures from the US intelligence
community like old Cold War warrior James Clapper and neocons in Pentagon
Ashton Carter (neocons were extremely well represented in Obama administration, starting with Hillary Clinton as the Secretary
Ashton Carter was one of the most extreme of the neocon hawks in the upper levels of the Bush Admin. His specific assignment
was to ensure there could never be a "peer competitor" by throwing money at the bleeding cutting edge of weapons technology.
Along the way, he was one of only two senior people openly advocated for a pre-emptive attack on N. Korea. Even Bush thought
that was too much, and even Cheney did not support it, but Carter pushed it. One can wonder how a neocon, wife of a leading neocon, came to be in charge in Ukraine, to declaim "f-the-EU" and boast of
spending billions to promote this second color revolution, giving cookies to open Nazis along the way.
However, now with Carter we see that the neocons have captured the policy part of the Obama Admin -- it wasn't an accident,
it was design that we did that, and now will go back into Iraq, attack Syria, and attack Iran.
Anti-Russia stories are instantly get the front coverage in NYT, WaPo and other prominent neoliberal publications as well as neoliberal
channels sympathetic to Democrats (CNN, MSNBC, CBS). Journalists then search for the people named by those leaks.
This part of media (which remains under control of 5 corporation and CIA) forms an informal coalition with the sources within the US
intelligence agances and plays important role
in fueling color revolution against President Trump.
In addition, think tanks launch another "frontal propaganda attack" producing all kind of position papers, op-ed pieces, interviews,
and such which adds momentum to the official spin. Their publication is followed by congressional hearings, policy conferences, and
public press briefings. A governmental policy debate ensues, producing studies, working papers, and eventually doctrines and policies
that become part of the media's spin. The new villain is now ready to be integrated into the popular culture to help to mobilize public
support for a new crusade. In the case of the Russian threat this process has been under way for more then a year. The current anti-Russian
witch hunt in the media was started by Hillary campaign in early 2016 as a smoke screen to shadow weakness of their candidate.
The Democratic Party nomenklatura is embarked on a massive media campaign to divert and reframe the election issues away from the economic and inequality
concerns expressed by the Sanders campaign. No to "break up the banks", no to "free public college", no to "Medicare for all", no campaign
funding reform. Now it reached the intensity of a new "Red Scare" hysteria of McCarthyism years. What is interesting is the propaganda
behaves exactly like brainwashing in high demand cult -- they do not care if it is true of not -- they just force feed you with it until
you internalize it (which is the definition of being brainwashed).
The primary aim of official propaganda is to generate an “official narrative” that can be mindlessly repeated by the ruling
classes and those who support and identify with them. This official narrative does not have to make sense, or to stand up to any
sort of serious scrutiny. Its factualness is not the point. The point is to draw a Maginot line, a defensive ideological boundary,
between “the truth” as defined by the ruling classes and any other “truth” that contradicts their narrative.
The current “Russian hacking” hysteria is a perfect example of how this works. No one aside from total morons actually believes
this official narrative (the substance of which is beyond ridiculous), not even the stooges selling it to us. This, however, is not
a problem, because it isn’t intended to be believed … it is intended to be accepted and repeated, more or less like religious dogma.
If Russian hackers did not exist, it would be necessary for the CIA to invent them via some kind of false operation. As long
as the neoliberal empire's geopolitical agenda of putting Russia in its place is thereby advanced, the truth of the allegations is irrelevant.
And they skillfully played the fact that nobody wants any foreign power influencing a US election. But along with Russia there were
definitely other players with strong interest in particular outcome and wast capabilities in this area. For example, Israel, GB, KSA, Iran, China, Pakistan,
To name just a few. They probably should be investigated with the same vigor (How
the Israel Lobby Works - The Unz Review):
The unholy alliance of Evangelicals and Zionists dominates our foreign policy in the Middle East. The first group has fantastic
notions from the Books of Revelations and Daniel about the coming war between good and evil. The second group, whose ideology
is based on integral nationalism which easily metasthesizes into Fascism, cares nothing about US interests.
It is not the first
time that groups in American favor anti-American policies in favor of another country; think only of pro-IRA politicians in the
Northeast, beginning with Congressman Peter King. But it is time to reject the irrationality of Evangelicals and Zionists and
strive for an American foreign policy. Israel should be no more no less important to us than, say, Finland.
We hear constantly of the power of the so-called Jewish Lobby, but no one ever explains how and why the Lobby has dome to have
If this Lobby weren’t useful to interests that transcend and ultimately have little to do with Jewish/Israeli interests,
few politicians would pay the Lobby any mind. Geopolitically, Israel is a useful tool of global elites. If the Israeli government
were to make serious peace overtures to the Palestinian factions and if these factions were to respond favorably, any peace effort
would be nipped in the bud by those who have a strong interest in keeping these entities from cooperating with one another.
Many Israelis know this. In fact, their alternative media shout it from the rooftops.
[…] The major organizations that comprise the Israel Lobby are well known: the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC),
the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the American Jewish Committee (AJC), the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations
and Christians United For Israel (CUFI). All are well known, benefiting from large budgets and staffs. They are extremely effective,
having excellent access to politicians and the media to promote their points of view, and are, as a group, regular visitors to
the White House. AIPAC is without doubt the most powerful lobby in the United States that is focused on a foreign policy issue.
Painting Russia as the principal US enemy was a typical neoliberal elites trick that help them to push for the New World Order
Painting Russia as the principal US enemy was a typical neoliberal elites trick that help them to push for the New World Order (the
US led global neoliberal empire, which is way resembles the dream of Trotsky about "World Revolution" which would create "World Communist
State"). And it is not the first time they use intelligence agencies as their propaganda machine. The fake news chant is just an addition
to the anti-Russian BS. The goal like with original McCarthyism is to delegitimize any voice other than neocon war mongers (original
McCarthyism also probably served as a smoke screen to hide large influx of specialists from Nazi Germany in the US. switch the public
attention to "communists infiltrators"; communism as an ideology was dead after 1945, when soviet solders saw the standard of living
of common folks in "capitalist" Central and Western Europe; it took another 45 years for it to collapse this quasi-religious society
aka theocrathy called the USSR ).
Yellowcake was probably the most well know recent case of fake news propagated by US government, the company of mass disinformation
of American people for nefarious ends. If involved a prominent US neocon
Michael Ledeen (the author of Ledeen doctrine "Every ten
years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world
we mean business"):
"The first meeting occurred in Rome in December, 2001. It included Franklin, Rhode, and another American, the neoconservative
writer and operative Michael Ledeen, who organized the meeting. (According to UPI, Ledeen was then working for Undersecretary
of Defense Douglas Feith as a consultant.) Also in attendance
was Ghorbanifar and a number of other Iranians."
... ... ...
Regarding the "pre-emptive" invasion of Iraq, in 2002 Ledeen criticized
the views of former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft,
He fears that if we attack Iraq "I think we could have an explosion in the Middle East. It could turn the whole region into
a cauldron and destroy the War on Terror."
One can only hope that we turn the region into a cauldron, and faster, please. If ever there were a region that richly deserved
being cauldronized, it is the Middle East today. If we wage the war effectively, we will bring down the terror regimes in Iraq,
Iran, and Syria, and either bring down the Saudi monarchy or force it to abandon its global assembly line to indoctrinate young
That's our mission in the war against terror.
This whole "Russian hacking" storyline looks so infantile that it is demeaning to the dignity of the United States. If would
be especially funny if this Russiagate operation was hatched in CIA, or Israel or some other state, as a false flag. another question
here is: "Is the United States the victim of an unprovoked cyber and media attack by Russia, or are the chickens coming home to roost
after Washington’s own promotion of such activity worldwide?" What was the role of the USA in Russia presidential elections of 2011-2012
after which Ambassador McFaul left the country and NED was expelled?
Field Marshall Montgomery said that the first rule of war is "Don't march on Moscow". But those who rule America ignore the wise.
Russia is a peaceful and friendly nation, but its elite does although converted to neoliberalism does not want vassal status (and Russia
briefly was the vassal of the USA under Yeltsin.)
We had the Russian hacking accusations for for over a year ( stemming mainly
from Hillary campaign operatives), but in 2017 they reached fervent pitch. The globalists and Democratic Party nomenklatura
launched massive media campaign to divert and reframe the election issues to save Clinton clan skin after election fiasco. This campaign
is designed to distract the population and specifically democratic electorate away from the economic and inequality concerns expressed
by the Sanders campaign and prevent shedding Clinton nomenklarura to the dustbin of history. Clinton clan want to preserver their power
over Democratic Party at all costs, even war with Russia is a the right price for them.
During Hillary campaign those accusations served as a shrewd deflection maneuver which helped to swipe her "private email server"
and "DNC corruption scandal" under the carpet. "Look, its Russians, who brought you those news. They are evil. Dismiss them" was the
Now this is amplified by the reaction of neocon lobby and other "national security parasites" (the fastest growing part of
the US military industrial complex with annual budget over 66 billions) to the new, less comfortable for them, political reality. In
which some of their current lucrative positions in national security establishment and as MIC lobbyists might no longer be available.
thee are jointed the gorwing part of the US elite which directly depends on the existence of global neoliberal empire led by the USA.
The fear (proved to be unfounded, like it was the case with Obama ;-) initially was that this "change we can believe in", if implemented
by Trump, also signifies career end of many prominent neocons such as Victoria Nuland in State Department, or Ashton B. Carter
In both cases this is a smoke screen to distract voters from the real problems facing the neoliberalism in USA and the rejection
of neoliberal globalization by the US population. The rejection of Hillary is tied to the fact that the American people are finally
becoming sick and tired of rampant militarism (aka New American Militarism,
as Professor Bacevich called it) with the costs in people lives and treasure. In this sense for some in Washington, the new Cold
War looks like a viable solution of problems that the USA faces now. Nothing personal, just business, Mr. Putin (The
In our recent history, however, the most dangerous moment of all may have been one of next to no fears, only of expectations for
the glories of an all-American world. I’m thinking of the years
regular Andrew Bacevich, author of
America’s War for the Greater Middle East: A Military History, returns to today, the ones after the Berlin Wall was
and the Soviet Union, that “evil empire” of Cold War fame, simply vanished, leaving behind only… well, us.
That was the moment when the political and intellectual elite who had fought the Cold War and the corporate elite, including the
warrior corporations of the military-industrial complex who had risen to power and fortune inside it, were suddenly staggered to
discover that there seemed to be no one left to oppose them, nothing to stop them from doing their damnedest.
They no longer support the neocon attempt to create global neoliberal empire led by the USA. They want to solve domestic problems
first and especially the problem of unemployment, which became rampant under neoliberalism. While "Obama recovery created some jobs",
it produced mostly McJobs in the service sector as well as "perma-temp" -- contractor jobs without benefits and health insurance
within the USA, while continuing shipping previous highly paid permanent jobs to other countries. this is how IT was outsourced (with
disastrous results, which are swiped under the carpet as the top brass does not care about negative consequences, as long as annual
bonuses increase or at least stay the same).
The USA needs to find the way out of the hole, which neoliberals dug for the majority of the US population
The real problem that the country faces is that neoliberalism (aka
Trotskyism for the rich) after around 40 years of world
dominance, like Bolshevism previously, had run its course. Ideology was discredited by events of 2008 but neoliberal state is
still strong (but without viable ideology it is like a zombie, equally bloodthirsty and dangerous).
The USA needs to find the way out of the hole, which neoliberals dug for the majority of the US population. the election of
Trump signifies among other thing, that people reject status quo. May we need be to restore major parts of New Deal (neo New Deal).
After 2008, neoliberal rationality is suspect and there is a
strong blowback against continuation of neoliberal globalization
which demonstrated itself in Brexit,
election of Trump,
and Renzi defeat in Italian referendum, which is huge win for EuroSkeptics. This disillusionment with the neoliberalism is very
deep for at least lower 80% of the US population.
There is no realistic way to establish where hacks came from after the fact, unless NSA did it when the hack occurred due to multiple
levels of indirection via zombie computers in various countries. There are botnets, which are definitely assessable to many hackers
with thousands, if not millions of computers in them.
All those insinuations that are published are really low level rumors reflecting the agenda of interested parties, as well as attempts
to deceive gullible public. They do not look convincing and many security professionals provided devastating critique of their content
and implied methodology (mainly IP space based).
Unless you understand that there is a larger agenda behind all this propaganda campaign, this level of concentration of MSM hype
on Russians looks strange, as if other pretty capable players (including some agencies in the USA and Israel, the supposed countries
of origin for Flame and Stuxnet).
Moreover Hillary (and, especially, Bill) did not inspire much love in a lot of people, including probably some people within NSA.
Also the hypothesis that this is a hack, not a leak is rather weak and was refute by research by Intelligence professionals
for sanity. The death of one of DNC staffer also was pretty suspicious and might be connected with the case. There was no open
investigation whether the death was connected with the leaks of DNC emails to Wikileaks, but Seth Rich was definitely was in position
to be a source the leak.
The fact the DNC computer security level (like Hillary personal email server) was dismal is well established -- they simply did not
pay the necessary amount of money to people and for the equipment to create a secure (even by weak standards of NIST guidelines)
infrastructure for running the campaign. They were operating mostly as a regular non-profit IT-wise. And that's while spending over
billion bucks on Hillary campaign. If someone is that stupid, he/she needs to face consequences.
And if you can't prove something it is better to shut up, not to incite anti-Russian hysteria to shade unpleasant facts revealed,
Among them the fact that DNC was a part of Hillary campaign and essentially had thrown Sanders under the bus.
And BTW the US government did tried to interfere in Russian Presidential election in 2011-2012. At least one US NGO (National Endowment
for Democracy - NED ) was kicked out the country after the elections exactly for this activity.
Each state has the right to defend itself from attempt to destabilize it, especially by external forces, which can guide internal
fifth column (in case of neoliberal it is neoliberal fifth column and the type of government destabilization used is known as color
revolutions). In a typical color revolution scenario their are set of efforts to undermine the legitimacy of the government. The
USA was one of the first recognizing this threat at time fascism was such a danger, with enacting
Sedition act and
Foreign Agents Registration Act.
But like with human body sometime immune system starts to dysfunction. That's why we have allergies and auto-immune diseases. In
those case the immune system attacks and kills healthy cells. I view McCarthyism as modern political auto-immune disease.
In no way a skeptical view of the US neoliberal society and critique of neoliberalism, even a sharp one, is equivalent to pro-Russian
Also Russia as a target is suspect, unless we subscribe to neocon agenda. Russia is just another Westernized neoliberal society.
They watch the same Hollywood junk and US citizens ;-). Major western propaganda channels like BCC are freely available in Russia
for anybody to view. They are not jammed, like in days of the USSR (which actually only increased their popularity). Unlike KSA
they do not behead over 100 people a year and prohibit woman to drive. And KSA is considered to be an ally.
All it does is weakly resist attempts to convert it into Washington vassal. In no way it challenges neoliberalism as a social system.
Putin brought Russia in WTO and Medvedev government is hell-bent of privatization of state assets. The fact that they do not want to
feed NYC financial sharks is of secondary importance.
Fake news is modern day rumors spread via Internet. The rise of rumors (aka "improvised news") signify a dramatic fall in the trust
to the establishment and official channel of distribution of information. This phenomenon is well known for anybody who studying Brezhnev's
rule in the USSR. Tamotsu Shibutani pioneered the study of this sociological phenomenon in his book
Improvised News A Sociological Study
of Rumor - Tamotsu Shibutani (1966). Here is the TOC:
1. ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTIONS OF RUMOR I
Distortion in Serial Transmission 3
Rumor as a Collective Transaction 9
The Social Control of Communication 17
The Situational Approach to Rumor 23
2. THE FAILURE OF FORMAL NEWS CHANNELS 31
Rumors of Environmental Changes 32
Crisis Situations and the News 37
Rumors in Sustained Collective Tension 46
Conditions of Rumor Construction 56
3. PROBLEM-SOLVING THROUGH DELIBERATION 63
Evolving Preoccupations of the Public 64
Rumor Construction through Discussion 70
Rumors as Plausible Extrapolations 76
Wish-Fulfillment in Rumor Content 86
4. SUGGESTIBILITY AND BEHAVIORAL CONTAGION 95
Intensification of Collective Tension 96
The Successive Alteration of Standards 108
Personal Equation in the Rumor Process 121
Consequences of Rumor-Consciousness 125
5. THE FORMATION OF POPULAR BELIEFS
Termination of the Rumor Process 130
The Development of Consensus 140
Reality Testing as a Social Process 148
Legendary Accounts and Historiography 155
6. A SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY OF RUMOR
Some Generalizations about Rumor 164
Society as a Communicative Process 166
Crisis and Collective Adjustment 172
Development through Natural Selection 176
7. THE POLITICAL MANIPULATION OF RUMOR
Informational Strategy in Politics 186
The Deliberate Propagation of Rumors 191
The Suppression of Inconvenient Rumors 200
Limitations of Institutional Control 208
Later this pioneering study was continued in a (much weaker) book The Global Grapevine: Why Rumors of Terrorism, Immigration,
and Trade Matter by By Gary Alan Fine, Bill Ellis (2010)
Far from mere idle tales, rumors are a valuable window into our anxieties and fears. Rumors let us talk as a community
about some very inflammatory issues--issues that may be embarrassing or disturbing to discuss-allowing us to act as if we are talking
about real events, not personal beliefs. We can air our hidden fears and desires without claiming these attitudes as our own.
Contemporary rumors can provide us with important information about the fears and pressures of globalization that the US population
now experiences. According to Fine&Ellix there are several connected with neoliberal globalization themes that emerge over and over
Rumors about terrorism,
Rumors about immigration,
Rumors about international trade
Rumors about trafficking of humans and medicine abuses such as illegal organ transplantation
I would add to it persistent rumors about sexual perversion of the elite, including pedophilia (for example, "pizzagate").
Rumors, which in view of existing conviction in "Lolita
express" case, are not completely without substance.
Various rumors tell us how Americans react to perceived global threats, how much they trust their own government (9/11 and especially
the sub-story of "Collapse of Building 7" are pretty telling examples here), how they interpret covert CIA actions that became
known (Operation Mockingbird,
JFK assasination) and deception that cost
the US so dearly (Iraq WMD scare). And most importantly how they interpret decimation of the "New Deal" and the new, much less charitable
to lower 90% of population neoliberal society in which they are now forced to live. As "New Deal" society is almost completely dismantled
with Medicare and Social Security being two major leftovers, which are under attack from neoliberals and constant attempts to privatize
In their book authors argue that rumors also reflect our anxieties and fears about contact with foreign cultures -- whether we believe
foreign competition to be poisoning the domestic economy or that foreign immigration to be eroding American values. That's why immigration
theme was so hot in the recent Presidential elections.
The dramatic collapse of Hillary Clinton campaign that had led to the election of Trump led to attempt to erect a post-election smokescreen
of this historic defeat of neoliberal establishment candidate supported by the leadership both parties in Congress and all major MSM.
And instead of analyzing the problems facing the US society, the problems which led to the election of Trump, Democrats and Obama administration
decided to play "Russians are coming" smoke screen.
With the concentration of DNC leak and Podesta email hack (the latter is due to the blunder, committed by Podesta himself,
who make a blunder and essentially provided his password to attackers on the plate. In reality, the real issue with DNC leaks is the
fact that Sanders campaign was sabotaged by crooks in DNC.
Those who wipe up anti-Russian hysteria should probably reread materials of
Church commission and history of interference of the US
intelligence agencies into the domestic politics. They might also and ask themselves a simple question: "Do they have any moral
right to to be sp indignant about supposed (not proved, but supposed) foreign interference in the US elections, if such an interference
is the cornerstone of the US foreign policy?"
Those who wipe up Russian hacking hysteria should probably reread materials of
Church commission and history of interference of
the US intelligence agencies into the domestic politics, including, but not limited to JFK assassination
While Russia represents an obstacle on the path of establishing global neoliberal empire led by the USA, it is not a threat. Unlike
the USSR it just another neoliberal society and Putin can be viewed as "soft globalist", not as isolationalist. He does want to
work with Western nation, but on more equal terms then the USA and EU prefer. He does not want Russia to became EU protectorate,
or the USA vassal (as it was under drunkard Yeltsin). The latter is unacceptable for the US neoliberal elite which is hell-bent on world
domination. Many positions in the Russian government are occupied by staunch, even by the USA standard, neoliberals, determined
to conduct the privatizing of government property and government companies, cutting social services to the bones, and generally adhering
to the postulates of Washington consensus as much as Chicago boys in the past.
Relations with Russia deteriorated after the USA launched in best Trotskyites style of (World Communist Revolution) the "Great
World Neoliberal Revolution", a series of "color revolutions" (starting with attack on Serbia) initiating "regime change"
for "not neoliberal enough" governments of countries with natural resources, or of some geopolitical value. All this under the
smoke screen promoting the democracy, as it it exist in the USA (which became a typical oligarchic republic (a democracy but only for
the top 1% or 10%, who are the only one able to select the candidate from two major parties), with two party system undistinguishable
in its major aspects from Soviet one party system; see Two Party System
as Polyarchy ) Also it is not clear why Russia would prefer Trump to Hillary. They definitely have a lot of dirt of
Hillary, and, especially, Clinton Foundation, probably much more then on Trump. Here is one post that addresses this issues (Economist's
View What’s Behind a Rise in Ethnic Nationalism Maybe the Economy, Oct 14, 2016):
Paradoxically Pravda in old times did have real insights into the US political system and for this reason was widely read by specialists.
Especially materials published by the Institute of the USA and Canada -- a powerful Russian think tank somewhat
similar to the Council on Foreign Relations.
As for your remark I think for many people in the USA Russophobia is just displaced Anti-Semitism.
JohnH remark is actually very apt and you should not "misunderestimate" the level of understanding of the US political system
by Russians. They did learn a lot about machinations of the neoliberal foreign policy, especially about so called "color revolutions."
Hillary&Obama has had a bloody nose when they tried to stage a "color revolution" in 2011-2012 in Russia (so called "white
revolution). A typical US citizen probably never heard about it or heard only about "Pussy riot", Navalny and couple of other
minor figures. At the end poor ambassador Michael McFaul was recalled. NED was expelled. Of course Russia is just a pale shadow
of the USSR power-wise, so Obama later put her on sanctions using MH17 incident as a pretext with no chances of retaliation. They
also successfully implemented regime change in Ukraine -- blooding Putin nose in return.
But I actually disagree with JohnH. First of all Putin does not need to interfere in a way like the USA did [in Russian
Presidential elections] in 2011-2012. It would be a waist of resources as both candidates are probably equally bad for Russia
(and it is the "deep state" which actually dictate the US foreign policy, not POTUS.)
The US political system is already the can of worms and the deterioration of neoliberal society this time created almost
revolutionary situation in Marxists terms, when Repug elite was not able to control the nomination. Democratic establishment still
did OK and managed to squash the rebellion, but here the level of degeneration demonstrated itself in the selection of the candidate.
Taking into account the level of dysfunction of the US political system, I am not so sure the Trump is preferable to Hillary
for Russians. I would say he is more unpredictable and more dangerous. The main danger of Hillary is Syria war escalation, but
the same is true for Trump who can turn into the second John McCain on a dime.
Also the difference between two should not be exaggerated. Both are puppets of the forces the brought them to the current level
and in their POTUS role will need to be subservient to the "deep state". Or at least to take into account its existence and power.
And that makes them more of prisoners of the position they want so much.
Trump probably to lesser extent then Hillary, but he also can't ignore the deep state. Both require the support of Republican
Congress for major legislative initiatives. And it would be very hostile to Hillary. Which is a major advantage for Russians,
as this excludes the possibility of some very stupid moves.
Again, IMHO in no way any of them will control the US foreign policy. In this area the deep state is in charge since Allen
Dulles and those who try to deviate too much might end as badly as JFK. I think Obama understood this very well and did not try
to rock the boat. And there are people who will promptly explain this to Trump in a way that he understands.
In other words, neither of them will escape the limit on their power that "deep state" enforces. And that virtually guarantee
the continuity of the foreign policy, with just slight tactical variations.
So why Russians should prefer one to another? You can elect a dog as POTUS and the foreign policy of the USA will be virtually
the same as with Hillary or Trump.
In internal policy Trump looks more dangerous and more willing to experiment, while Hillary is definitely a "status quo" candidate.
The last thing Russians needs is the US stock market crush. So from the point of internal economic policy Hillary is also preferable.
A lot of pundits stress the danger of war with Russia, and that might be true as women in high political position try to outdo
men in hawkishness. But here Hillary jingoism probably will be tightly controlled by the "deep state". Hillary definitely tried
to be "More Catholic then the Pope" in this area while being the Secretary of State. That did not end well for her and she might
learn the lesson.
But if you think about the amount of "compromat" (Russian term ;-) on Hillary and Bill that Russians may well already collected,
in "normal circumstances" she might be a preferable counterpart for Russians. As in "devil that we know". Both Lavrov and Putin
met Hillary. Medvedev was burned by Hillary. Taking into account the level of greed Hillary displayed during her career, I would
be worried what Russians have on her , as well as on Bill "transgressions" and RICO-style actions of Clinton Foundation.
And taking into account the level of disgust amount the government officials with Hillary (and this is not limited to Secret
Service) , new leaks are quite possible, which might further complicate her position as POTUS.
In worst case, the first year (or two) leaks will continue. Especially if damaging DNC leaks were the work of some disgruntled
person within the USA intelligence and not of some foreign hacker group. That might be a plus for Russians as such a constant
distraction might limit her possibility to make some stupid move in Syria. Or not.
As you know personal emails boxes for all major Web mail providers are just one click away for NSA analysts. So "Snowden II"
hypothesis might have the right to exist.
Also it is quite probably that impeachment process for Hillary will start soon after her election. In the House Republicans
have enough votes to try it. That also might be a plus for s for both Russia and China. Trump is extremely jingoistic as for Iran,
and that might be another area were Hillary is preferable to Russians and Chinese over Trump.
Also do not discount her health problems. She does have some serious neurological disease, which eventually might kill her.
How fast she will deteriorate is not known but in a year or two the current symptoms might become more pronounced. If Bill have
STD (and sometime he looks like a person with HIV;
that further complicates that picture (this is just a rumor, but he really looks bad).
I think that all those factors make her an equal, or even preferable candidate for such states as Russia and China.
This is the situation of "king is naked" -- the state that teaches other countries about democracy has a completely corrupted election
process within each party, like a typical banana republic. That what Wikileak revelations proved. In his post
Is Russia our enemy?
Colonel W. Patrick Lang is a retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces (The Green Berets) aptly
The Democratic Party convention and the media are full of the assumption that Russia is the enemy of the United States. What
is the basis for that assumption?
Russian support for the Russian ethnic minority in eastern Ukraine? How does that threaten the United States?
Russian annexation of the Crimea? Khrushchev arbitrarily transferred that part of Russia to Ukraine during his time
as head of the USSR. Khrushchev was a Ukrainian. Russia never accepted the arbitrary transfer of a territory
that had been theirs since the 18th Century. How does this annexation threaten the United States?
Russia does not want to see Syria crushed by the jihadis and acts accordingly? How does that threaten the United States?
Russia threatens the NATO states in eastern Europe? Tell me how they actually do that. Is it by stationing their
forces on their side of the border with these countries? Have the Russians made threatening statements about the NATO states?
Russia has made threatening and hostile statements directed at the United States? When and where was that?
Russia does not accept the principle of state sovereignty? Really? The United States is on shaky ground citing
that principle. Remember Iraq?
Russian intelligence may have intercepted and collected the DNC's communications (hacked) as well as HC's stash of illegal
e-mails? Possibly true but every country on earth that has the capability does the same kind of thing every single day. That would
include the United States.
The Obama Administration is apparently committed to a pre-emptive assertion that Russia is a world class committed enemy of the
United States. The Borgist media fully support that.
We should all sober up.
The anti-Russian theme has been such an most important in Hillary presidential campaign that the subsequent full-scale anti-Russian
hysteria after her defeat is not surprising.
Hillary always preferred to join ranks with neocons, military-industrial complex and plain-vanilla Russophobes (katehon.com,
Jul 28. 2016) and neocon are afraid of losing some power and lucrative, well paid positions. Look how easily Robert Kagan defected
to Democratic Party. Several important US Departments such as Department of State, Department of Defense, and CIA are staffed mainly
with neocons:. They will fight the idea of normalization of relations with Russia until better end:
Speaking at a press conference in Florida, Trump called on Russia to hand over the 30,000 emails "missing" from the Hillary Clinton's
email server in the US. Their absence is a clear sign that Clinton destroyed evidence proving that she used her personal e-mail server
to send sensitive information. Democrats immediately accused Trump of pandering to Russian hackers, although in reality the multi-billionaire
rhetorically hinted that the data that Clinton hid from the American investigation is in the hands of foreign intelligence services.
So, Clinton is a possible target for blackmail.
Trump's statement that he is ready to discuss the status of Crimea and the removal of anti-Russian sanctions caused even more
noise. This view is not accepted either in the Democrat or in the Republican mainstream. Trump also said that Vladimir Putin does
not respect Clinton and Obama, while Trump himself hopes to find a common language with him. Trump appreciates Putin's leadership
and believes that the US must work together with Russia to deal with common threats, particularly against Islamic extremism.
Hide The establishment's tantrum
Both Democrats and Republicans are taking aim at Trump. The vice-presidential candidate, Mike Pence, made threats to Russia.
The head of the Republican majority in Congress, Paul Ryan, became somewhat hysterical. He said that Putin is "a thug and should
stay out of these elections."
It is Putin personally, and the Russian security services, who are accused of leaking correspondences of top employees of the
National Committee of the Democratic Party. This unverified story united part of the Republicans and all of the Democrats, including
the Clinton and Barack Obama themselves. Trump supporters note that the Russian threat is used to divert attention from the content
of these letters. And these show the fraud carried out during the primaries which favored Hillary Clinton.
Hide The pro-American candidate
The "Russian scandal" demonstrates that on the one hand the thesis of the normalization of relations with Russia, despite
the propaganda, is becoming popular in US society. It is unlikely that Donald Trump has made campaign statements that are not designed
to gain the support of the public in this election. On the other hand - Trump - a hard realist, like Putin, is not pro-Russian, but
a pro-American politician, and therefore the improvement of relations with Russia in his eyes corresponds to the US's national interests.
Trump has never to date done anything that would not be to his advantage. Sometimes he even said he would order US fighter jets to
engage with Russian ones, and declared he would have a hard stance in relations with Russia.
Another thing is that his understanding of US national interests is fundamentally different from the dominant American globalist
elite consensus. For Trump, the US should not be the source of a global liberal remaking of the world, but a national power, which
optimizes its position just as efficiently as any commercial project. And in terms of optimizing the position of the United States,
he says there should be a normal American interaction with Putin and Russia in the field of combating terrorism and preventing the
sliding of the two countries into a global war. He claims this is to be the priority instead of issues relating to the promotion
of democracy and the so-called fight against "authoritarian regimes".
While Congress now is trying to create "ministry of Truth", the fearmonring that the US MSM are now propagating is a variation of
the well known McCarthyism theme "The Russians are Coming". And can be legitimately called Neo-McCartyism.
Here is nice satire on the topic (washingtonsblog.com):
MC: President Putin, did the Russian government hack the DNC email server and then publically release those emails through
Wikileaks the day before the Democratic convention?
MC: Yes! Are you serious?
Putin: I’m quite serious.
MC: How can you justify this open meddling in United States politics?
Putin: Your question should be what took Russia so long. The US oligarchs and their minions surround us with military bases
and nuclear missiles, damage our trade to Europe, and seek to destabilize our domestic politics. These emails are nothing in
the big picture. But they’re sort of funny, don’t you agree?
MC: I’m not sure that funny is the right word. What do you mean by that?
Putin: You’ve got Hillary Clinton running as a strong and independent woman. Of course, nobody would know who
she is had she not married Bill Clinton. She’s not independent. Quite the contrary. She had to marry a philandering redneck to get
to where she is. When it comes to strength, I can say only this. How strong can you be if you have to cheat and create a rigged game
to win the nomination?
MC: Anything else about your leak to cheer us up?
Putin: This situation is the epitome of ironic humor. After the emails were released, the focus was all on DNC Chair and
Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. That’s fine for now but what happens when people start asking why Wasserman-Schultz had the
DNC screw Sanders and boost Hillary? Did she just wake up one day and decide this on her own?. Not likely. She was and remains Hillary’s
agent. It will take people a while to arrive that answer. When enough people hear about Wasserman-Schultz’s key role
in the Clinton campaign, everything will be clear. It’s adios Hillary. That inevitable conclusion, by the way, is the
reason the DNC made such a big deal about Russia hacking the DNC. That was diversion one right out of the gate.
As for DNC hack (or was it a leak ?) there is no realistic way to establish where hacks came from after the fact. All those insinuations
that are published are really low level crap, attempts to deceive gullible public. I do not understand this level of concentration of
MSM hype on Russians, as if other pretty capable players (including some in the USA) do not exist and do not have any motivation to
look closely into DNC files. Hillary (and, especially, Bill) did not inspire much love in a lot of people.
Also the hypothesis that this is a hack, not a leak is rather weak. The death of one of DNC staffer was pretty suspicious and might
be connected with the case.
While he is highly critical of Wikileaks, he suggests that without NSA coming forward with hard data obtained via special program
that uncover multiple levels of indirection, those charges are just propaganda and insinuations. And BTW after the fact it is usually
impossible to discover who obtained the information, as they use multiple levels of indirection and Russia might be just one of those
indirection levels. Use of Russian IP-space or Russian IPS might be just an attempt to create a false trail and to implicate a wrong
As in any complex case you should not jump to conclusions so easily.
The fact the DNS computer security level (like Hillary personal email server) was dismal is well established -- they simply did not
pay the necessary amount of money to people and for the equipment to created a viable (according to NIST guidelines) secure infrastructure
for running the campaign. They were operating mostly as a non-profit IT-wise. And that's while spending over billion bucks on
Hillary campaign. If somebody is that stupid, he/she needs to face consequences.
And if you can't prove something it is better to shut up, not to incite anti-Russian hysteria to hide under this smokescreen very unpleasant
facts revealed -- that DNC was a part of Hillary campaign and essentially had thrown Sanders under the bus.
And BTW the US government did tried to interfere in Russian Presidential election in 2011-2012. At least one US NGO was kicked out
the country after the elections exactly for this.
DNC and Clinton pushed the Russian card very hard in anticipation of further stories and revelations of corruption, money laundering,
etc. See DNC emails leak
Technical analysis of this "hack" (which can well be, and probably is a "leak") provided by MSM is by-and-large idiotic, entry level
nonsense. The fact that hacking case are complex and fuzzy makes them perfect smokescreen -- powerful tools for deflecting attention
from a read content of messages revealed as well as the most plausible source to Russians. Such scapegoating achieve two goals: unite
the population swiping important differences under the carpet and an accepting inferior candidate in the name of "unity" in the face
of powerful and ruthless enemy, and deflecting unpleased questions revealed by email as enemy propaganda.
BTW stories about Russian codepage used, ec are very suspect. In such cases the originator might deside to use to provide a direct
the investigation in the wrong direction. also many countries on the globe such as Germany, Israel, GB and USA has a large Russian speaking
population, that is well represented in IT industry (and by extension in corresponding part of three letter agencies).
When the USA (or Israel) opened this can of worm with Stixnet (discovered around mid 2010) and Flame (discovered around 2012), they
did not expect a powerful blowback. Now it start coming: those days it is simply impossible to secure "normal" Microsoft-based IT system
against any sophisticated adversary. Not very difficult, but impossible.
To say nothing about stock systems that DNC and Hillary used (as if they have not money to harden them to the level recommended by
at least NIST guidelines). They also did not have adequate intrusion alarm system and restricted IP space for clients (client of such
systems should exist only on VPN).
Remember that we live in the period when developed by NSA and probably their foreign "friends" Flame and Stixnet worm are part of
the recorded history of malware. And technologies used in them are well studied by all major world three letter agencies.
They means that methods of this level of complexity became a part of their workbook. And the response to their devilishness
they generated even more devilish methods of attack of any IT infrastructure based on Microsoft technologies, to say nothing about such
low hanging fruit as stock Microsoft software installation with semi-competent IT staff using Microsoft Exchange based email system
on public network: (naked
Yup, as a former server admin it is patently absurd to attribute a hack to anyone in particular until a substantial amount
of forensic work has been done. (read, poring over multiple internal log files…gathering yet more log files of yet more internal
devices, poring over them, then – once the request hops out of your org – requesting logfiles from remote entities, poring over
*those* log files, requesting further log files from yet more upstream entities, wash rinse repeat ad infinitum).
For example, at its simplest, I would expect a middling-competency hacker to find an open wifi hub across town to connect
to, then VPN to server in, say, Tonga, then VPN from there to another box in Sweden, then connect to a PC previously compromised
in Iowa, then VPN to yet another anonymous cloud server in Latvia, and (assuming the mountain dew is running low, gotta get cracking)
then RDP to the target server and grab as many docs as possible. RAR those up and encrypt them, FTP them to a compromised media
server in South Korea, email them from there to someones gmail account previously hacked, xfer them to a P2P file sharing app,
and then finally access them later from a completely different set of servers.
In many cases where I did this sort of analysis I still ended up with a complete dead end: some sysadmins at remote companies
or orgs would be sympathetic and give me actual related log files. Others would be sympathetic but would not give files, and instead
do their own analysis to give me tips. Many never responded, and most IPs ended up at unknown (compromised) personal PCs,
or devices where the owner could not be found anyway.
If the hacker was sloppy and left other types of circumstantial evidence you might get lucky – but that demographic mostly
points back to script kiddies and/or criminal dweebs – i.e., rather then just surreptitiously exfiltrating the goods they instead
left messages or altered things that seemed to indicate their own backgrounds or prejudices, or left a message that was more easily
'traced'. If, of course, you took that evidence at face value and it was not itself an attempt at obfuscation.
Short of a state actor such as an NSA who captures it ALL anyway, and/or can access any log files at any public or private
network at its own whim – its completely silly to attribute a hack to anyone at this point.
So, I guess I am reduced to LOL OMG WTF its fer the LULZ!!!!!
Just to clarify on the "…If the hacker was sloppy and left other types of circumstantial evidence…" – this is basically what
I have seen reported as 'evidence' pointing to Russia: the Cyrillic keyboard signature, the 'appeared to cease work on Russian
holidays' stuff, and the association with 'known Russian hacking groups'.
That's great and all, but in past work I am sure my own 'research' could easily have gotten me 'associated' with known
hacking groups. Presumably various 'sophisticated' methods and tools get you closer to possible suspects…but that kind of stuff
is cycled and recycled throughout the community worldwide – as soon as anything like that is known and published, any reasonably
competent hacker (or org of hackers) is learning how to do the same thing and incorporating such things into their own methods.
(imitation being the sincerest form of flattery)
I guess I have a lot more respect for the kinds of people I expect to be getting a paycheck from foreign Intelligence agencies
then to believe that they would leave such obvious clues behind 'accidentally'. But if we are going to be starting wars over this
stuff w/Russia, or China, I guess I would hope the adults in the room don't go all apesh*t and start chanting COMMIES, THE RUSSIANS
ARE COMING!, etc. before the ink is dry on the 'crime'.
The whole episode reminds me of
the Sony hack , for which Obama
also blamed a demonized foreign power. Interestingly - to beg the question here - the blaming was also based on a foreign character
set in the data (though Hangul, not Korean). Look! A clue!
JacobiteInTraining's methodology also reminds me of NC's coverage of Grexit. Symbol manipulators - like those in the Democrat-leaning
creative class - often believe that real economy systems are as easy to manipulate as symbol systems are. In Greece, for example,
it really was a difficult technical challenge for Greece to reintroduce the drachma, especially given the time-frame, as contributor
Clive remorselessly showed. Similarly, it's really not credible to hire a consultant and get a hacking report with a turnaround time
of less than a week, even leaving aside the idea that the DNC just might have hired a consultant that would give them the
result they wanted (because who among us, etc.) What JacobiteInTraining shows us is that computer forensics is laborious, takes time,
and is very unlikely to yield results suitable for framing in the narratives proffered by the political class. Of course, that does
confirm all my priors!
There is a problem with those who argue that these are sophisticated Nation State attackers and then point to the most
basic circumstantial evidence to support their case. I'd bet that, among others, the Israelis have hacked some Russian servers
to launch attacks from and have some of their workers on a Russian holiday schedule. Those things have been written about in attack
analysis so much over the last 15-20 years that they'd be stupid not to.
Now, I'm not saying the Israelis did it. I'm saying that the evidence provided so far by those arguing it is Russia is
so flaky as to prove that the Russia accusers are blinded or corrupted by their own political agenda.
One of the strongest pieces of evidence linking GRU to the DNC hack is the equivalent of identical fingerprints found in
two burglarized buildings: a reused command-and-control address - 176.31.112[.]10 - that was
hard coded in a piece of malware found both
in the German parliament as well as on the DNC's servers. Russian military intelligence was identified by the German domestic
security agency BfV as the actor responsible for the Bundestag breach. The infrastructure behind the fake MIS Department domain
was also linked to the Berlin intrusion through at least one other element, a
shared SSL certificate.
This paragraph sounds quite damning if you take it at face value, but if you invest a little time into checking the source
material, its carefully constructed narrative falls apart.
Problem #1: The IP address 176.31.112[.]10 used in the Bundestag breach as a Command and Control server has never been
connected to the Russian intelligence services. In fact, Claudio Guarnieri , a highly
regarded security researcher, whose technical analysis was
referenced by Rid, stated that "no evidence allows
to tie the attacks to governments of any particular country."
Mind you, he has two additional problems with that claim alone.
This piece is a must read if you want to dig further into this topic.
 More than a talking point but, really, less than a narrative. It's like we need a new word for these bite-sized, meme-ready,
disposable, "throw 'em against the wall and see if they stick" stories; mini-narrative, or narrativelette, perhaps. "All the crunch
of a real narrative, but none of the nutrition!"
 This post is not about today's Trump moral panic, where the political class is frothing and stamping about The Donald's
humorous (or ballbusting, take your pick) statement that he
Russians had hacked the 30,000 emails that Clinton supposedly deleted from the email server she privatized in her public capacity
as Secretary of State before handing the whole flaming and steaming mess over to investigators. First, who cares? Those emails are
all about yoga lessons and Chelsea's wedding. Right? Second, Clinton didn't secure the server for three months. What did she expect?
Third, Trump's suggestion is just dumb; the NSA has to have that data, so just ask them? Finally, to be fair, Trump shouldn't have
uttered the word "Russia." He should have said "Liechtenstein," or "Tonga," because it's hard to believe that there's a country too
small to hack as fat a target as Clinton presented; Trump was being inflammatory. Points off. Bad show.
For those interested, the excellent interviewer Scott Horton just spoke with Jeffrey Carr, an IT security expert about all
this. It's about 30 mins:
Jeffrey Carr, a cyber intelligence expert and CEO of Taia Global, Inc., discusses his fact-checking of Josh Marshall's TalkingPointsMemo
article that claims a close alliance between Trump and Putin; and why the individuals blaming Russia for the DNC email hack
are more motivated by politics than solid evidence.
Carr makes the point that even supposed clues about Russian involvement ("the default language is Cyrillic!") are meaningless
as all these could be spoofed by another party.
Separately it just shows again Team Clinton's (and DNC's) political deviousness and expertise how they –with the full support
of the MSM of course –have managed to deflect the discussion to Trump and Russia from how the DNC subverted US democracy.
and again, we see the cavalier attitude about national security from the clinton camp, aggravating the already tense relationship
with russia over this bullshit, all to avoid some political disadvantage. clinton doesn't care if russia gets the nuclear launch
codes seemingly, but impact her chances to win the race and it's all guns firing.
Well yeah, and I could be a bot, how do you know I'm not?
Absent any other evidence to work with, I can accept it as credible that a clumsy Russian or Baltic user posted viewed
and saved docs instead of the originals; par for the course in public and private bureaucracies the world over. It would have
been useful to see the original Properties metadata; instead we get crapped up copies. That only tells me the poster is something
of a lightweight, and it at least somewhat suggests that these docs passed through multiple hands.
But that doesn't mean A) the original penetration occurred under state control (or even in Russia proper), much less B) that
Putin Himself ordered the hack attempts, which is the searing retinal afterimage that the the media name-dropping and photo-illustrating
Unspoofed, the Cyrillic fingerprints still do not closely constrain conclusion to A, and even less to B.
Another name for the trick DNC used is "Catch a chief" -- a deflection of attention from their own criminal behaviour. But they should
now be really afraid about what can come next from Wikileaks or elsewhere. I don't think Hillary was capable to understand how easy
it is to find corruption, especially when there's a email trail. And this lack of understanding is a typical feature of a sociopath
). As Guardian reported (The
Guardian) Clinton campaign also tried old "dog eat my homework" trick blaming everything on Putin and trying to ignore the content
of them and the dirty laundry they expose:
Hillary Clinton’s campaign has accused Russia of meddling in the 2016 presidential election, saying its hackers stole Democratic
National Committee (DNC) emails and released them to foment disunity in the party and aid Donald Trump.
Clinton’s campaign manager, Robby Mook, said on Sunday that “experts are telling us that Russian state actors broke into the DNC,
stole these emails, [and are] releasing these emails for the purpose of helping Donald Trump”.
“I don’t think it’s coincidental that these emails are being released on the eve of our convention here,” he told CNN’s State
of the Union, alluding to the party’s four-day exercise in unification which is set to take place this week in Philadelphia.
“This isn’t my assertion,” Mook said. “This is what experts are telling us.”
In a statement, the Clinton campaign repeated the accusation: “This is further evidence the Russian government is trying to influence
the outcome of the election.”
Classic scapegoating. As Guardian commenter noted "Why is the (potential) perpetrator of the leak more significant than the content
of the leak?? "As life exceeds satire, one can Wikileaks later produced large parts of Hillary's Wall Street speeches, following
the appeal from Trump.
In any case a major US establishment party explicitly levied it's resources against a candidate it didn't like behaviors like a Mafioso
clan, and when caught red handed start to deflect attention via corrupt and subservant MSM, changing focus into Russia and Putin instead.
I find very I interesting that, somehow, the initial DNC leak story failed to make a headline position (a day late, at
that) on the Guardian, but now that it's blown up on other channels, the DNC's ridiculous conspiracy theory/distraction attempt
gets top billing here. Ridiculous.
Why is the (potential) perpetrator of the leak more significant than the content of the leak?? A major US establishment party
explicitly levied it's resources against a candidate it didn't like, and somehow we're talking about Putin instead. Great journalism.
Chanze Jennings -> atopic
The Guardian has sunk to a new low and has entirely no shame. It's a sad day for journalism when Twitter has more integrity
than most news outlets. And they wonder why newspapers are going the way of the Dodo. Remember when real journalists presented
stories with little bias and tried hard to stick to the facts?
BTW there are some real experts on this and they have a different opinion. Check comments for the blog post:
ABC and CNN during this Presidential compaisn were essentially the DNC propaganda wing. They and most other MSM were trying to reshape
this mess to reduce the amount of damage. Stephanopolis worked for Bill Clinton. And donated $75,000 to Hillary's campaign. And
now he is trying to paint Trump as having ties to the Putin regime.
You are going to have to do a heck of a lot better than that. A Saudi Prince has admitted to funding a large portion of Hillary's
campaign. That is a tie. All the money she took from those countries while benefiting them as Secretary of State is a tie.
Know Mei > deanbob
"Spoken like someone who has never been a member of the Democratic Party and has no understanding of what we do," Debbie Wasserman
Schultz. Oh, believe me, Debbie, the American people know what the Democratic Party and the Republican Party does. Both parties
embellish, manipulate, grant high positions to big donors, plot, backstab and railroad the vote of the American electorate. However,
business as usual did not work well for the Republican Party elitists this primary season. Donald Trump beat the Republican Party
elitists at their game. Bernie Sanders attempted to do the same to the Democratic Party.
I think they are being short-sighted. Trump will in all likelihood win now and I don't see him sticking to the script.
The media has completely betrayed the American public on this story. From Facebook and Twitter blocking and deleting stories re:
same initially - to now with the non-articles we are getting from the big news agencies. Finding decent, honest news coverage
shouldn't be so hard. see more
William Carr > Know Mei •
“Both parties embellish, manipulate, grant high positions to big donors, plot, backstab and railroad the vote of the American
In reality Wikileaks exposed the blatant corruption of the primary process for voters. The elephant was in the room, but the real
situation with Democratic Party primary process is now suppressed.
What the USA really needs is international observers on the next Presidential elections. Instead the US Congress adopted S.
3274 “Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act” which essentially create the US variant of the USSR
"Ministry of Propaganda and Agitation". As if NED, USAID, State Department's Bureau
of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL), the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI), the International
Republican Institute (IRI), the Center for Independent Private Enterprise (CIPE), and the American Center for International Labor Solidarity
("Solidarity Center") are not enough (Soft
Power Democracy-Promotion and U.S. NGOs - Council on Foreign Relations)
That suggests that the US lawmakers at last realized that promoted by them color
revolution techniques practiced by the USA on xUSSR and other countries may come home to roost but reacted to this threat
the way that bureaucracy typically react to such things -- creating a new organization (in this case the USSR style Ministry of Propaganda
and Agitation) that should address this issue:
To counter foreign disinformation and propaganda, and for other purposes. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES July 14, 2016 Mr.
Portman (for himself and Mr. Murphy) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign
Relations A BILL To counter foreign disinformation and propaganda, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by
the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. Short title.
This Act may be cited as the “Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act”.
SEC. 2. Center for information analysis and response.
(a) Establishment.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall establish
a Center for Information Analysis and Response (in this section referred to as the “Center”). The purposes of the Center
are— (1) to coordinate the sharing among government agencies of information on foreign government information warfare efforts,
including information provided by recipients of information access fund grants awarded using funds made available under subsection
(e) and from other sources, subject to the appropriate classification guidelines;
(2) to establish a process for integrating information on foreign propaganda and disinformation efforts into national strategy;
(3) to develop, plan, and synchronize interagency activities to expose and counter foreign information operations
directed against United States national security interests and advance narratives that support United States allies and
(b) Functions.—The Center shall carry out the following functions:
(1) Integrating interagency efforts to track and evaluate counterfactual narratives abroad that threaten the
national security interests of the United States and United States allies, subject to appropriate regulations governing the dissemination
of classified information and programs.
(2) Analyzing relevant information from United States Government agencies, allied nations, think-tanks, academic institutions,
civil society groups, and other nongovernmental organizations.
(3) Developing and disseminating thematic narratives and analysis to counter propaganda and disinformation
directed at United States allies and partners in order to safeguard United States allies and interests.
(4) Identifying current and emerging trends in foreign propaganda and disinformation, including the use of print, broadcast,
online and social media, support for third-party outlets such as think tanks, political parties, and nongovernmental organizations,
in order to coordinate and shape the development of tactics, techniques, and procedures to expose and refute foreign
misinformation and disinformation and proactively promote fact-based narratives and policies to audiences outside the United States.
(5) Facilitating the use of a wide range of information-related technologies and techniques to counter foreign disinformation
by sharing expertise among agencies, seeking expertise from external sources, and implementing best practices.
(6) Identifying gaps in United States capabilities in areas relevant to the Center’s mission and recommending necessary enhancements
(7) Identifying the countries and populations most susceptible to foreign government propaganda and disinformation.
(8) Administering and expending funds made available pursuant to subsection (e).
(9) Coordinating with allied and partner nations, particularly those frequently targeted by foreign disinformation
operations, and international organizations and entities such as the NATO Center of Excellence on Strategic Communications,
the European Endowment for Democracy, and the European External Action Service Task Force on Strategic Communications, in order
to amplify the Center’s efforts and avoid duplication.
(c) Interagency manager.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The President is authorized to designate an official of the United States Government
to lead an interagency team and to manage the Center. The President shall delegate to the manager of the Center responsibility
for and presumptive authority to direct and coordinate the activities and operations of all departments, agencies, and elements of
the United States Government in so far as their support is required to ensure the successful implementation of a strategy approved
by the President for accomplishing the mission. The official so designated shall be serving in a position in the executive branch
by appointment, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(2) INTERAGENCY STEERING COMMITTEE.—
(A) COMPOSITION.—The Interagency Manager shall establish a Steering Committee composed of senior representatives
of agencies relevant to the Center’s mission to provide advice to the Manager on the operations and strategic orientation of the
Center and to ensure adequate support for the Center. The Steering Committee shall include one senior representative designated
by each of the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Administrator of the
United States Agency for International Development, and the Chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors .
(B) MEETINGS.—The Interagency Steering Committee shall meet not less than every 3 months.
(C) PARTICIPATION AND INDEPENDENCE.—The Chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors shall not compromise the journalistic
freedom or integrity of relevant media organizations. Other Federal agencies may be invited to participate in the Center
and Steering Committee at the discretion of the Interagency Manager.
(3) SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY.—
(A) LIMITATION ON SCOPE.—The delegated responsibility and authority provided pursuant to paragraph (1) may not extend beyond the
requirements for successful implementation of the mission and strategy described in that paragraph.
(B) APPEAL OF EXECUTION OF ACTIVITIES.—The head of any department, agency, or other element of the United States Government may
appeal to the President a requirement or direction by the official designated pursuant to paragraph (1) for activities otherwise
in support of the mission and strategy described in that paragraph if such head determines that there is a compelling case
that executing such activities would do undue harm to other missions of national importance to the United States.
(4) TARGETED FOREIGN AUDIENCES.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The activities under this subsection of the Center described in paragraph (1)
shall be done only with the intent to influence foreign audiences. No funds for the activities of the team under
this section may be used with the intent to influence public opinion in the United States.
(B) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this subsection may be construed to prohibit the team described in paragraph (1) from engaging
in any form of communication or medium, either directly or indirectly, or coordinating with any other department or agency
of the United States Government, a State government, or any other public or private organization or institution because a United
States domestic audience is or may be thereby exposed to activities or communications of the team under this subsection,
or based on a presumption of such exposure.
(d) Staff.— (1) COMPENSATION.—The President may fix the compensation of the manager of the Center and other personnel without
regard to chapter 51 and subchapter III of
chapter 53 of title 5, United States
Code, relating to classification of positions and General Schedule pay rates, except that the rate of pay for the executive director
and other personnel may not exceed the rate payable for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of that title.
(2) DETAIL OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES.—Any Federal Government employee may be detailed to the Center without reimbursement,
and such detail shall be without interruption or loss of civil service status or privilege.
(3) PROCUREMENT OF TEMPORARY AND INTERMITTENT SERVICES.—The President may procure temporary and intermittent services under section
3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic
pay prescribed for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of that title.
(e) Funds.—Of amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2017 for the Department of Defense and identified as undistributed
fuel cost savings, up to $250,000,000 may be available for purposes of carrying out this section and the grant program established
under section 3. Once obligated, such funds shall remain available for such purposes until expended.
SEC. 3. Information access funds.
(a) Grants and contracts of financial support.—The Center may provide grants or contracts of financial support to civil
society groups, journalists, nongovernmental organizations, federally funded research and development centers, private companies,
or academic institutions for the following purposes: (1) To support local independent media who are best placed
to refute foreign disinformation and manipulation in their own communities.
(2) To collect and store examples in print, online, and social media of disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda
directed at the United States and its allies and partners.
(3) To analyze tactics, techniques, and procedures of foreign government information warfare with respect to disinformation, misinformation,
(4) To support efforts by the Center to counter efforts by foreign governments to use disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda
to influence the policies and social and political stability of the United States and United States allies and partners.
(b) Funding availability and limitations.—All organizations that apply to receive funds under this section must undergo
a vetting process in accordance with the relevant existing regulations to ensure their bona fides, capability, and experience,
and their compatibility with United States interests and objectives.
SEC. 4. Inclusion in Department of State education and cultural exchange programs of foreign students and community leaders from
countries and populations susceptible to foreign manipulation. The President shall ensure that when the Secretary of State is selecting
participants for United States educational and cultural exchange programs, the Secretary of State gives special consideration to
students and community leaders from populations and countries the Secretary deems vulnerable to foreign propaganda and disinformation
SEC. 5. Reports.
(a) In general.—Not later than one year after the establishment of the Center, the President shall submit to the appropriate
congressional committees a report evaluating the success of the Center in fulfilling the purposes for which it was authorized
and outlining steps to improve any areas of deficiency.
(b) Appropriate congressional committees defined.—In this section, the term “appropriate congressional committees” means— (1)
the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs,
the Select Committee on Intelligence, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and
(2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Homeland Security, the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
SEC. 6. Termination of center and steering committee. The Center for Information Analysis and Response and the interagency
team established under section 2(c) shall terminate 15 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 7. Rule of construction regarding relationship to intelligence authorities and activities. Nothing in this Act shall be construed
as superseding or modifying any existing authorities governing the collection, sharing, and implementation of intelligence programs
and activities or existing regulations governing the sharing of classified information and programs.
"... In May, the company, Crowdstrike, determined that the hack was the work of the Russians. As one unnamed intelligence official told BuzzFeed, "CrowdStrike is pretty good. There's no reason to believe that anything that they have concluded is not accurate ..."
"... Perhaps not. Yet Crowdstrike is hardly a disinterested party when it comes to Russia. Crowdstrike's founder and chief technology officer, Dmitri Alperovitch , is also a senior fellow at the Washington think tank, The Atlantic Council, which has been at the forefront of escalating tensions with Russia. ..."
"... As I reported in The Nation in early January , the connection between Alperovitch and the Atlantic Council is highly relevant given that the Atlantic Council is funded in part by the State Department, NATO, the governments of Latvia and Lithuania, the Ukrainian World Congress, and the Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk. In recent years, it has emerged as a leading voice calling for a new Cold War with Russia. ..."
"... But meanwhile the steady drumbeat of "blame Russia" is having an effect. According to a recent you.gov/Economist poll, 58 percent of Americans view Russia as "unfriendly/enemy" while also finding that 52 percent of Democrats believed Russia "tampered with vote tallies." ..."
Today something eerily similar to the pre-war debate over Iraq is taking place regarding the
allegations of Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election. Assurances from the
intelligence community and from anonymous Obama administration "senior officials" about the
existence of evidence is being treated as, well, actual evidence.
Department spokesman John Kirby told CNN that he is "100% certain" of the role that Russia
played in U.S. election. The administration's expressions of certainty are then uncritically
echoed by the mainstream media. Skeptics are likewise written off, slandered as " Kremlin
cheerleaders " or worse.
Unsurprisingly, The Washington Post is reviving its Bush-era role as principal publicist for
the government's case. Yet in its haste to do the government's bidding, the Post has published
two widely debunked stories relating to Russia (one on the scourge of Russian inspired "fake
news", the other on a non-existent Russian hack of a Vermont electric utility) onto which the
paper has had to append "editor's notes" to correct the original stories.
Yet, those misguided stories have not deterred the Post's opinion page from being equally
aggressive in its depiction of Russian malfeasance. In late December, the Post published an
op-ed by Rep. Adam Schiff and former Rep. Jane Harmon claiming "Russia's
theft and strategic leaking of emails and documents from the Democratic Party and other
officials present a challenge to the U.S. political system unlike anything we've
On Dec. 30, the Post editorial board
chastised President-elect Trump for seeming to dismiss "a brazen and unprecedented attempt
by a hostile power to covertly sway the outcome of a U.S. presidential election." The Post
described Russia's actions as a "cyber-Pearl Harbor."
On Jan. 1, the neoconservative columnist Josh Rogin
told readers that the recent announcement of
sanctions against Russia "brought home a shocking realization that Russia is using hybrid
warfare in an aggressive attempt to disrupt and undermine our democracy."
Meanwhile, many of the same voices who were among the loudest cheerleaders for the war in
Iraq have also been reprising their Bush-era roles in vouching for the solidity of the
Jonathan Chait, now a columnist for New York magazine, is clearly convinced by what the
government has thus far provided. "That Russia wanted Trump to win has been obvious for
months," writes Chait.
"Of course it all came from the Russians, I'm sure it's all there in the intel," Charles
Krauthammer told Fox News on Jan. 2. Krauthammer is certain.
And Andrew Sullivan is certain as to the motive. "Trump and Putin's bromance," Sullivan told MSNBC's Chris Matthews on Jan. 2, "has
one goal this year: to destroy the European Union and to undermine democracy in Western
writing in The Atlantic , believes Trump "owes his office in considerable part to illegal
clandestine activities in his favor conducted by a hostile, foreign spy service."
Jacob Weisberg agrees, tweeting: "Russian covert action threw the election to Donald Trump.
It's that simple." Back in 2008, Weisberg
wrote that "the first thing I hope I've learned from this experience of being wrong about
Iraq is to be less trusting of expert opinion and received wisdom." So much for that.
Foreign Special Interests
Another, equally remarkable similarity to the period of 2002-3 is the role foreign lobbyists
have played in helping to whip up a war fever. As readers will no doubt recall, Ahmed Chalabi,
leader of the Iraqi National Congress, which served, in effect as an Iraqi government-in-exile,
worked hand in hand with the Washington lobbying firm Black, Kelly, Scruggs & Healey (BKSH)
to sell Bush's war on television and on the op-ed pages of major American newspapers.
Chalabi was also a trusted source of Judy Miller of the Times, which, in an apology to its
readers on May 26,
2004, wrote : "The most prominent of the anti-Saddam campaigners, Ahmad Chalabi, has been
named as an occasional source in Times articles since at least 1991, and has introduced
reporters to other exiles. He became a favorite of hard-liners within the Bush administration
and a paid broker of information from Iraqi exiles." The pro-war lobbying of the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee has also been exhaustivelydocumented .
Though we do not know how widespread the practice has been as of yet, something similar is
taking place today. Articles calling for confrontation with Russia over its alleged "hybrid
war" with the West are
. Perhaps the most egregious example of this newly popular genre appeared on Jan. 1 in
magazine. That essay, which claims, among many other things, that "we're in a war" with
Russia comes courtesy of one Molly McKew.
McKew is seemingly qualified to make such a pronouncement because she, according to her bio
on the Politico website, served as an "adviser to Georgian President Saakashvili's government
from 2009-2013, and to former Moldovan Prime Minister Filat in 2014-2015." Seems reasonable
enough. That is until one discovers that McKew is actually registered with the
Department of Justice as a lobbyist for two anti-Russian political parties, Georgia's UMN
and Moldova's PLDM.
Records show her work for the consulting firm Fianna Strategies frequently takes her to
Capitol Hill to lobby U.S. Senate and Congressional staffers, as well as prominent U.S.
journalists at The Washington Post and The New York Times, on behalf of her Georgian and
"The truth," writes McKew, "is that fighting a new Cold War would be in America's interest.
Russia teaches us a very important lesson: losing an ideological war without a fight will ruin
you as a nation. The fight is the American way." Or, put another way: the truth is that
fighting a new Cold War would be in McKew's interest -- but perhaps not America's.
While you wouldn't know it from the media coverage (or from reading deeply disingenuous
pieces like McKew's) as things now stand, the case against Russia is far from certain. New
developments are emerging almost daily. One of the latest is a report from the
cyber-engineering company Wordfence, which concluded that "The IP
addresses that DHS [Department of Homeland Security] provided may have been used for an attack
by a state actor like Russia. But they don't appear to provide any association with
Indeed, according to Wordfence, "The malware sample is old, widely used and appears to be
Ukrainian. It has no apparent relationship with Russian intelligence and it would be an
indicator of compromise for any website."
On Jan. 4,
BuzzFeed reported that, according to the DNC, the FBI never carried out a forensic
examination on the email servers that were allegedly hacked by the Russian government. "The
FBI," said DNC spokesman Eric Walker, "never requested access to the DNC's computer
What the agency did do was rely on the findings of a private-sector, third-party vendor that
was brought in by the DNC after the initial hack was discovered. In May, the company,
Crowdstrike, determined that the hack was the work of the Russians. As one unnamed intelligence
official told BuzzFeed, "CrowdStrike is pretty good. There's no reason to believe that anything
that they have concluded is not accurate. "
Perhaps not. Yet Crowdstrike is hardly a disinterested party when it comes to Russia.
Crowdstrike's founder and chief technology officer, Dmitri Alperovitch , is also a senior fellow at the
Washington think tank, The Atlantic Council, which has been at the forefront of escalating
tensions with Russia.
reported in The Nation in early January , the connection between Alperovitch and the
Atlantic Council is highly relevant given that the Atlantic Council is funded in part by the State
Department, NATO, the governments of Latvia and Lithuania, the Ukrainian World Congress, and
the Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk. In recent years, it has emerged as a leading voice
calling for a new Cold War with Russia.
Time to Rethink the 'Group Think'
And given the rather thin nature of the declassified evidence provided by the Obama
administration, might it be time to consider an alternative theory of the case? William Binney,
a 36-year veteran of the National Security Agency and the man responsible for creating many of
its collection systems, thinks so. Binney believes that the DNC emails were leaked, not hacked,
that "it is puzzling why NSA cannot produce hard evidence implicating the Russian
government and WikiLeaks. Unless we are dealing with a leak from an insider, not a hack."
None of this is to say, of course, that Russia did not and could not have attempted to
influence the U.S. presidential election. The intelligence community may have
intercepted damning evidence of the Russian government's culpability. The government's
hesitation to provide the public with more convincing evidence may stem from an
understandable and wholly appropriate desire to protect the intelligence community's sources
and methods. But as it now stands the publicly available evidence is open to question.
But meanwhile the steady drumbeat of "blame Russia" is having an effect. According to a
poll, 58 percent of Americans view Russia as "unfriendly/enemy" while also finding that 52
percent of Democrats believed Russia "tampered with vote tallies."
With Congress back in session, Armed Services Committee chairman John McCain is set to hold
a series of hearings focusing on Russian malfeasance, and the steady drip-drip-drip of
allegations regarding Trump and Putin is only serving to box in the new President when it comes
to pursuing a much-needed detente with Russia.
It also does not appear that a congressional inquiry will start from scratch and critically
examine the evidence. On Friday, two senators -- Republican Lindsey Graham and Democrat Sheldon
announced a Senate Judiciary subcommittee investigation into Russian interference in
elections in the U.S. and elsewhere. But they already seemed to have made up their minds about
the conclusion: "Our goal is simple," the senators said in a joint statement "To the fullest
extent possible we want to shine a light on Russian activities to undermine democracy."
So, before the next round of Cold War posturing commences, now might be the time to stop,
take a deep breath and ask: Could the rush into a new Cold War with Russia be as disastrous and
consequential -- if not more so -- as was the rush to war with Iraq nearly 15 years ago? We
may, unfortunately, find out.
James W Carden is a contributing writer for The Nation and editor of The American
Committee for East-West Accord's eastwestaccord.com. He previously served as an advisor on
Russia to the Special Representative for Global Inter-governmental Affairs at the US State
Don G. , February 5, 2017 at 14:29
Questioning whether the Russians hacked or didn’t hack is playing into the US
narrative to demonize Russia. (Putin)
It simple doesn’t matter as all nations hack as much as possible to enhance and protect
their national interests. Surely Russia has hacked against the US no more than a tenth of
what the US had done against Russia.
The narrative is nothing but a propaganda lie but it’s been accepted by the American
people and mostly because of the fight that goes on due to domestic politics, one major party
against the other.
There’s a very good reason to stop promoting the narrative because it only helps to
bring Americans onside with more efforts to demonize Putin and to keep all sides in the US
promoting their aggression worldwide. Americans are likely easily 90% prowar now and will
show little or no resistance to the coming war on Iran. <img alt=''
2x' class='avatar avatar-60 photo' height='60' width='60' />
yugo , February 4, 2017 at 13:54
Hysteria has reached fever pitch. Russia’s fake news is apparently so beguiling that
it even threatens western democratic discourse. Combine this with its cyber weaponry and
Moscow, so we are told, may interfere in this year’s German elections to benefit the
hard-right. Such incessant fear mongering has already prompted calls for the censorship of
Russian propaganda. It won’t be long before a witch-hunt emerges, directed against
‘fellow travellers’, those who dare to doubt the Russian threat.
They insist the west made matters worse in Ukraine by not acknowledging that it was a
classic example of a young state that didn’t naturally command the allegiance of all
its peoples. Other examples are Georgia’s Abkhazians and South Ossetians,
Moldova’s Trans-Dniester Slavs and Azerbaijan’s Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians.
They also doubt the Russian threat to the Baltic states. What is amazing is Moscow’s
temperate response to Estonia and Latvia’s gross violation of international norms in
denying citizenship to those of its Russian minority who are not conversant in Estonian and
Latvian respectively. Nato and the EU turned a blind eye when membership was granted to these
Fellow travellers furthermore claim the west will keep on floundering in the Middle East
as long as it persists in treating Saudi Arabia as a valued ally, while viewing Iran as a
permanent enemy. We have for far too long ignored Saudi Arabia’s promotion of Wahhabism
and its playing of the destructive sectarian card against ‘apostate’ Shiites.
Take the merciless attacks on Shiite worshippers by Sunni jihadis of a Wahhabist persuasion.
It occurs with sickening regularity throughout the Middle East. The terrorists attacking
westerners are invariably Sunni jihadis, not Shiites. Worse still, Saudi Arabia together with
Nato member Turkey facilitated the emergence of Isis. We bizarrely gave priority to toppling
Syria’s secular regime.
The first loyalty of these fellow travellers is to their nation state rather than
unfettered globalism. No wonder the western elite disparage their national patriotism,
calling it populism. It was, after all, the Achilles Heel of Homo Sovieticus. The elite fear
the same fate awaits Homo Europaeus and globalist Homo Economicus.
Michael K Rohde , February 3, 2017 at 15:12
This is beginning to look exactly like Iraq 2 and why the same players that led us into
that fake war which is still not paid for because the initiators made sure and get themselves
a tax cut before they launched it are still being listened to makes it clear. Even with a
change in administrations and party our government continues in the same wrong headed
direction, to war with the enemies of Israel. When will it stop? When will we take back
control of our foreign policy and destiny. <img alt=''
2x' class='avatar avatar-60 photo' height='60' width='60' />
Michael Hoefler , February 3, 2017 at 23:29
As Ray McGovern said several times (not quoting): that Israel is the elephant in the room.
Netayahu will not rest until he has all of the Arab states fighting among themselves. IMO he
thinks that that will guarantee Israel protection.
IMO – all that does is put Israel into a continuing worse situation. There will always
be someone stronger to come along to overcome them – someday – sometime. If they
made peace with those nations and worked with them, traded with them – they would be
much safer in the long run.
The mainstream media in th USA and, increasingly in the rest of the West are vehicles for
propaganda from various factions within the Imperial Deep State. All these outlets are good
for is to map the power relations between these factions at least this the case in the major
issues of the day.
This misbehavior going on right now. One factions close to Trump wants to go to war with
Iran because, of course there has to be war or the Deep State as a whole stuffers and the
people will begin to look at their shakles. The other faction wishes to go to a brinksmanship
sort of Cold War situation. The Trumpists believe that making friends with Russia and then
destroying Iranian power is the best approach to controlling the MENA region by creating a
loose alliance of KSA, Israel, Turkey and Russia in which a weak Iran would be forced to
enter the Empire and Russia in return would be given more control of Ukraine and Eastern
Europe. I suspect Trump may also want to undercut NATO and the EU. That is my guess. To put
it another way, Russia is strong and well led and Iran is not.
stan , February 3, 2017 at 14:17
You can read chapter 6 of Mein Kampf if you want to see how this war propaganda stuff
works. It is not group think or mistaken ideas. It is deliberate lies to scare you and a
carefully crafted false narrative to make it all seem reasonable. People cannot believe that
their leaders would tell such a big lie, and that’s why it works. The goal is murder
and conquest to get territory, natural resources, and control of business and commerce.
Controlling markets for drugs, gambling, and prostitution is for nickel and dime crooks.
Controlling markets for natural resources, banking, and consumer and industrial goods is
where the real money is. Think of governments as criminal business syndicates and you
aren’t far off. Remember, President Obama had a hit list, flew around plane loads of
secret cash to make illegal payoffs, and bragged about offing his opponent in the head and
dumping his body in the river.
Jeremy , February 4, 2017 at 11:33
Yes, Stan,well put! you will never see this sort of talk in the articles here, as the
consipiracy theorist label is always one to avoid, but I agree that when we think in terms of
a group of people trying to attain “security” the same way any other gangster
does, it becomes much less far fetched. George Carlin said, “It’s a big club, and
you ain’t in it!” Men and women of power and wealth will always do what they have
to in order to preserve that power and wealth for their children. There is really no
conspiracy needed, just a bunch of people at the top looking after themselves and their
Tania Messina , February 3, 2017 at 14:13
Ah, yes, we’ve always needed a boogeyman to keep us all crazed with fear and the
neocons busy with their destruction of society. If there is a crazy out there today, it is
those neocons and their puppets who were so intent on destroying “seven countries in
five years” and not being able to achieve that diabolical end as so neatly planned.
And, now, they’re throwing temper tantrums, because, surprise of surprises! a non
career politician comes along who uses common sense for a change and dares to say, “Why
can’t we be friends with Russia?” With that comment many exhausted Americans
perked up and listened while the Dulles boys turned somersaults in their graves!
The arrogance and superiority of those who constantly blame Russia for their alleged
expansionist ambitions seem blinded to our own aggressions. Fifteen years in Iraq? We finally
have a president who talks of peace and we demonize him as the warmonger ready to press the
button, while I seem to remember that it was the other candidate who arrogantly referred to
Putin as Hitler!
It is articles like this one by James Carden that we should be teaching in our schools,
researching the facts and discussing in our classrooms so that hopefully a new generation
might grow up with intelligent exchange rather than the brainwash that has been strangling
our society for too many years.
Mark Thomason , February 3, 2017 at 13:04
This controversy is driven by Democratic denial of defeat, and infighting in which those
defeated seek to hang on to power inside the Democratic Party. It is the Hillary crowd. It
can be evidence free because it is driven by political calculation of private power needs,
And the WMD fiasco is a perfect comparison, because the same people drove the same sort of
fact-free theme for private reasons, as Wolfowitz put it, the story around which varying
separate interests could be rallied.
"... One might reasonably ask if America in its seemingly enduring role as the world's most feared bully will ever cease and desist, but the more practical question might be "When will the psychopathic trio of John Bolton, Mike Pompeo and Elliott Abrams be fired so the United States can begin to behave like a normal nation?" ..."
"... This hatred of all things Trump has been manifested in the neoconservative "Nevertrump" forces led by Bill Kristol and by the "Trump Derangement Syndrome" prominent on the political left, regularly exhibited by Rachel Maddow. ..."
"... Whether the Mueller report is definitive very much depends on the people they chose to interview and the questions they chose to ask, which is something that will no doubt be discussed for the next year if not longer. Beyond declaring that the Trump team did not collude with Russia, it cast little light on the possible Deep State role in attempting to vilify Trump and his associates. ..."
"... The media has scarcely reported how Michael Horowitz, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice (DOJ), has been looking into the activities of the principal promoters of the Russiagate fraud. Horowitz, whose report is expected in about a month, has already revealed that he intends to make criminal referrals as a result of his investigation. ..."
"... The first phase of the illegal investigation of the Trump associates involved initiating wiretaps without any probable cause. This eventually involved six government intelligence and law enforcement agencies that formed a de facto task force headed by the CIA's Director John Brennan. Also reportedly involved were the FBI's James Comey, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Department of Homeland Security Director Jeh Johnson, and Admiral Michael Rogers who headed the National Security Agency. ..."
"... The British support of the operation was coordinated by the then-director of GCHQ Robert Hannigan who has since been forced to resign. Brennan is, unfortunately still around and has not been charged with perjury and other crimes. In May 2017, after he departed government, he testified before Congress with what sounds a lot like a final unsourced, uncorroborated attempt to smear the new administration ..."
"... The Deep State wants a constant state of tension with 'hostile' countries (Iran, Russia, Venezuela, China, Syria and others). This scares the crap out of ignorant Americans and allows unjustifiable spending on war matériel. ..."
"... The Deep State wants a steady supply of cheap foreign labor to provide wealth to the supporters of the Deep State. ..."
"... You know damn well Adelson sent Bolton and you should also know damn well why the Orange Boy staffed his adm with Zionists. No one in NY except Zionists would associate with Trump. ..."
The real "deplorable" in today's United States is the continuation of a foreign policy based
on endless aggression to maintain Washington's military dominance in parts of the world where
Americans have no conceivable interest. Many voters backed Donald J. Trump because he committed
himself to changing all that, but, unfortunately, he has reneged on his promise, instead
heightening tension with major powers Russia and China while also threatening Iran and
Venezuela on an almost daily basis. Now Cuba is in the crosshairs because it is allegedly
assisting Venezuela. One might reasonably ask if America in its seemingly enduring role as the
world's most feared bully will ever cease and desist, but the more practical question might be
"When will the psychopathic trio of John Bolton, Mike Pompeo and Elliott Abrams be fired so the
United States can begin to behave like a normal nation?"
Trump, to be sure, is the heart of the problem as he has consistently made bad, overly
belligerent decisions when better and less abrasive options were available, something that
should not necessarily always be blamed on his poor choice of advisers. But one also should not
discount the likelihood that the dysfunction in Trump is in part comprehensible, stemming from
his belief that he has numerous powerful enemies who have been out do destroy him since before
he was nominated as the GOP's presidential candidate. This hatred of all things Trump has been
manifested in the neoconservative "Nevertrump" forces led by Bill Kristol and by the "Trump
Derangement Syndrome" prominent on the political left, regularly exhibited by Rachel
And then there is the Deep State, which also worked with the Democratic Party and President
Barack Obama to destroy the Trump presidency even before it began. One can define Deep State in
a number of ways, ranging from a "soft" version which accepts that there is an Establishment
that has certain self-serving objectives that it works collectively to promote to something
harder, an actual infrastructure that meets together and connives to remove individuals and
sabotage policies that it objects to. The Deep State in either version includes senior
government officials, business leaders and, perhaps most importantly, the managed media, which
promotes a corrupted version of "good governance" that in turn influences the public.
Whether the Mueller report is definitive very much depends on the people they chose to
interview and the questions they chose to ask, which is something that will no doubt be
discussed for the next year if not longer. Beyond declaring that the Trump team did not collude
with Russia, it cast little light on the possible Deep State role in attempting to vilify Trump
and his associates. The investigation of that aspect of the 2016 campaign and the possible
prosecutions of former senior government officials that might be a consequence of the
investigation will likely be entertaining conspiracy theorists well into 2020. Since Russiagate
has already been used and discarded the new inquiry might well be dubbed Trumpgate.
The media has scarcely reported how Michael Horowitz, the Inspector General of the
Department of Justice (DOJ), has been
looking into the activities of the principal promoters of the Russiagate fraud. Horowitz,
whose report is expected in about a month, has already revealed that he intends to make
criminal referrals as a result of his investigation. While the report will only cover
malfeasance in the Department of Justice, which includes the FBI, the names of intelligence
officers involved will no doubt also surface. It is expected that there will be charges leading
to many prosecutions and one can hope for jail time for those individuals who corruptly
betrayed their oath to the United States Constitution to pursue a political vendetta.
A review of what is already known about the plot against Trump is revealing and no doubt
much more will be learned if and when investigators go through emails and phone records. The
first phase of the illegal investigation of the Trump associates involved initiating wiretaps
without any probable cause.
This eventually involved six government intelligence and law enforcement agencies that
formed a de facto task force headed by the CIA's Director John Brennan. Also reportedly
involved were the FBI's James Comey, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Attorney
General Loretta Lynch, Department of Homeland Security Director Jeh Johnson, and Admiral
Michael Rogers who headed the National Security Agency.
Brennan was the key to the operation because the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
(FISA) court refused to approve several requests by the FBI to initiate taps on Trump
associates and Trump Tower as there was no probable cause to do so but the British and other
European intelligence services were legally able to intercept communications linked to American
sources. Brennan was able to use his connections with those foreign intelligence agencies,
primarily the British GCHQ, to make it look like the concerns about Trump were coming from
friendly and allied countries and therefore had to be responded to as part of routine
intelligence sharing. As a result, Paul Manafort, Carter Page, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner
and Gen. Michael Flynn were all wiretapped. And likely there were others. This all happened
during the primaries and after Trump became the GOP nominee.
In other words, to make the wiretaps appear to be legitimate, GCHQ and others were quietly
and off-the-record approached by Brennan and associates over their fears of what a Trump
presidency might mean. The British responded by initiating wiretaps that were then used by
Brennan to justify further investigation of Trump's associates. It was all neatly done and
constituted completely illegal spying on American citizens by the U.S. government.
The British support of the operation was coordinated by the then-director of GCHQ Robert
Hannigan who has since been forced to resign. Brennan is, unfortunately still around and has
not been charged with perjury and other crimes. In May 2017, after he departed government, he
Congress with what sounds a lot like a final unsourced, uncorroborated attempt to smear the
new administration :
"I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and
interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign that I
was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals. It raised
questions in my mind whether or not Russia was able to gain the co-operation of those
Brennan's claimed "concerns" turned out to be incorrect. Meanwhile, other interested parties
were involved in the so-called Steele Dossier on Trump himself. The dossier, paid
for initially by Republicans trying to stop Trump, was later funded by $12 million from the
Hillary campaign. It was commissioned by the law firm Perkins Coie, which was working for the
Democratic National Committee (DNC). The objective was to assess any possible Trump involvement
with Russia. The work itself was sub-contracted to Fusion GPS, which in turn sub-contracted the
actual investigation to British spy Christopher Steele who headed a business intelligence firm
Steele left MI-6 in 2009 and had not visited Russia since 1993. The report, intended to dig
up dirt on Trump, was largely prepared using impossible to corroborate second-hand information
and would have never surfaced but for the surprise result of the 2016 election. Christopher
Steele gave a copy to a retired of British Diplomat Sir Andrew Wood who in turn handed it to
Trump critic Senator John McCain who then passed it on to the FBI. President Barack Obama
presumably also saw it and, according to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, "If it weren't for
President Obama, we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that
set off a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today, notably, special counsel
The report was leaked to the media in January 2017 to coincide with Trump's inauguration.
Hilary Clinton denied any prior knowledge despite the fact that her campaign had paid for it.
Pressure from the Democrats and other constituencies devastated by the Trump victory used the
Steele report to provide leverage for what became the Mueller investigation.
So, was there a broad ranging conspiracy against Donald Trump orchestrated by many of the
most senior officials and politicians in Washington? Undeniably yes. What Trump has amounted to
as a leader and role model is beside the point as what evolved was undeniably a bureaucratic
coup directed against a legally elected president of the United States and to a certain extent
it was successful as Trump was likely forced to turn his back on his better angels and
subsequently hired Pompeo, Bolton and Abrams. One can only hope that investigators dig deep
into what is Washington insiders have been up to so Trumpgate will prove more interesting and
informative than was Russiagate. And one also has to hope that enough highest-level heads will
roll to make any interference by the Deep State in future elections unthinkable. One hopes.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest,
a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a
more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is
councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its
email is firstname.lastname@example.org .
The President is part of the Deep State. To understand what the Deep State will and will not tolerate answer these questions.
What do both parties agree on? If they appear to disagree, look to see if anything changes
when one party has the power to cause change or does the party in power make excuses to avoid
change? Those things that the populus is against but never change or get worse are what the
Deep State wants
The Deep State wants a constant state of tension with 'hostile' countries (Iran, Russia,
Venezuela, China, Syria and others). This scares the crap out of ignorant Americans and
allows unjustifiable spending on war matériel.
The Deep State wants a steady supply of cheap foreign labor to provide wealth to the
supporters of the Deep State.
The Deep State wants our financial institutions to never fail (FED 2009) even at the
expense of 90% of Americans. The Deep State wants financial institutions to provide financial
products to the wealthy which cripples the vast majority of Americans.
The silly internecine squabbles within the Deep State are a ruse to misdirect the public
from important issues like constant war, legal and illegal immigrants taking jobs from
Americans and the increased transfer of wealth for the 90% to the supper weathy.
There will never be a wall and illegal immigration will continue to be a problem. All the investigations into Trump, the DNC, Hillary and all the rest will never come to
justice. The wealth transfer will not stop
Until Americans realize these diversions for what they are and put an end to it through
what ever means necessary
i think some of the conspiracy was about controlling Trump's foreign policy going forward but
i also think some of it was people like Brennan worried CIA collusion with Saudi funded
jihadist groups since 9/11 (and possibly before) might come out.
"Carnage needs to destroyed" mentality is dominant among the USA neoliberal elite and drives the policy toward Russia.
They all supported neoconservative extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda directed on weakening Russian and
establishing of world dominance. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this
"... There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this. ..."
"... This agenda has involved hopes for 'régime change' in Russia, whether as the result of an oligarchic coup, a popular revolt, or some combination of both. Also central have been hopes for a further 'rollback' of Russia influence in the post-Soviet space, both in areas now independent, such as Ukraine, and also ones still part of the Russian Federation, notably Chechnya. ..."
"... And, crucially, it involved exploiting the retreat of Russian power from the Middle East for 'régime change' projects which it was hoped would provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. ..."
"... Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky. ..."
"... it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep.. ..."
"... I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence". ..."
"... It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate. ..."
"... And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that. ..."
"... Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ..."
"... They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress West's posture; say 2040 ..."
"... In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG) dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. ..."
"... State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis" and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union ..."
"... About relation Steele-MI6, well, you never leave your IS. Or to put it in another way, you are never out of the scope of your past IS ..."
"... No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming. ..."
"... Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons. ..."
"... Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing. ..."
"... Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program. ..."
"... IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war. ..."
"... The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem for regular people, to worry about. ..."
"... A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario Scaramella. ..."
"... Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality? Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear. ..."
Steele, Shvets, Levinson, Litvinenko and the 'Billion Dollar Don.'
In the light of the suggestion in the Nunes memo that Steele was 'a longtime FBI source' it seems worth sketching out some background,
which may also make it easier to see some possible reasons why he 'was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate
about him not being president.'
There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements
in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign
policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion
GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this.
This agenda has involved hopes for 'régime change' in Russia, whether as the result of an oligarchic coup, a popular revolt, or
some combination of both. Also central have been hopes for a further 'rollback' of Russia influence in the post-Soviet space, both
in areas now independent, such as Ukraine, and also ones still part of the Russian Federation, notably Chechnya.
And, crucially, it involved exploiting the retreat of Russian power from the Middle East for 'régime change' projects which it
was hoped would provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the
Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which
clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander
Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on
your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky.
The question of what links these had, or did not have, with elements in U.S. intelligence agencies is thus a critical one.
In making some sense of it, the fact that one key figure we know to have been involved in this network was missing at the Inquiry
– the former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared on the Iranian island of Kish in March 2007 – is important.
Unfortunately, I only recently came across a book on Levinson published in 2016 by the 'New York Times' journalist Barry Meier,
which is now hopefully winging its way across the Atlantic. From the accounts of the book I have seen, such as one by Jeff Stein
in 'Newsweek', it seems likely that its author did not look at any of the evidence presented at Owen's Inquiry.
Had he done so, Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling
attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko's death. A Radio
4 programme on 16 December 2006, presented by the veteran BBC presenter Tom Mangold, had been wholly devoted to an account by Shvets,
backed up by Levinson. Both of these were, like Litvinenko, supposed to be impartial 'due diligence' operatives.
The notion that any of them might have connections with Western intelligence agencies was not considered. The – publicly available
– evidence of the involvement of Shvets, whose surname means 'cobbler' or 'shoemaker' in Ukrainian, in the processing of the tapes
of conversations involving the former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma supposedly recorded by Major Melnychenko, which had played
a crucial role in the 2004-5 'Orange Revolution' was not mentioned.
Still less was it mentioned that claims that the – very dangerous – late Soviet Kolchuga system, which made it possible the kind
of identification of incoming aircraft which radar had traditionally done, without sending out signals which made the destruction
of the facilities doing it possible, had been sold by Kuchma to Iraq had proven spurious.
What Shvets had done had been to take – genuine – audio in which Kuchma had discussed a possible sale, and edit it to suggest
a sale had been completed.
(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)
As a former television current affairs producer, I can talk to you of the marvels which London audio editors can produce, very
happily. Unfortunately, the days when not all BBC and 'Guardian' journalists were corrupt stenographers for corrupt and incompetent
spooks, as Mangold and his like have been for Steele and Levinson, are long gone.
All this has become particularly relevant now, given that Simpson has placed the notorious Jewish Ukrainian mobster Semyon Mogilevich
and the 'Solntsevskaya Bratva' mafia group centre stage in his accounts not simply of Trump and Manafort, but also of William Browder.
For most of the 'Nineties, Levinson had been a, if not the, lead FBI investigator on Mogilevich.
(On this, see the 1999 BBC 'Panorama' programme 'The Billion Dollar Don', also presented by Tom Mangold, which has extensive interviews
both with Mogilevich and Levinson at
In the months leading up to Levinson's disappearance, a key priority for the advocates of the strategy I have described was to
prevent it being totally derailed by the patently catastrophic outcome of the Iraqi adventure.
Compounding the problem was the fact that this had created the 'Shia Crescent', which in turn exacerbated the potential 'existential
threat' to Israel posed by the steadily increasing range, accuracy and numbers of missiles available to Hizbullah in hardened positions
north of the Litani.
These, obviously, provided both a 'deterrent' for that organisation and Iran, and also a radical threat to the whole notion that
somehow Israel could ever be a 'safe haven' for Jews, against the supposedly ineradicable disposition of the 'goyim' sooner or later
to, as it were, revert to type. The dreadful thought that Israel might not be necessary had to be resisted at all costs.
What followed from the disaster unleashed by the – Anglo-American – 'own goal' in toppling Saddam was, ironically, a need on the
part of key players to 'double down.' Above all, it was necessary for many of those involved to counter suggestions from the Russian
side that going around smashing up 'régimes' that one might not like sometimes blew up in one's face.
Even more threatening were suggestions from the Russian side that it was foolish to think one could use jihadists without risking
'blowback', and that there might be an overwhelming common interest in combating Islamic extremism.
Another priority was to counter the pushback in the American 'intelligence community' and military, which was to produce the drastic
downgrading of the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear programme in the November 2007 NIE and then the resignation of Admiral William
Fallon as head of 'Centcom' the following March.
So in 2005 Shvets came to London. He and his audio editors had another 'bite at the cherry' of the Melnychenko tapes, so that
material that did in fact establish that both the SBU and FSB had collaborated with Mogilevich could be employed to make it seem
that Putin had a close personal relationship with the mobster.
All kinds of supposedly respectable American and British academics, like Professors Karen Dawisha and Robert Service, have fallen
for this, hook, line and sinker. It gives a new meaning to the term 'useful idiot.'
(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)
In a letter sent in December that year by Litvinenko to the 'Mitrokhin Commission', for which his Italian associate Mario Scaramella
was a consultant, this was used in an attempt to demonstrate that Mogilevich, while acting as an agent for the FSB and under Putin's
personal 'krysha', had attempted to supply a 'mini atomic bomb' – aka 'suitcase nuke' – to Al Qaeda. Shortly after the letter was
sent Scaramella departed on a trip to Washington, where he appears to have got access to Aldrich Ames.
(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)
At precisely this time, as Meier explains, Levinson was in the process of being recruited by a lady called Anne Jablonski who
then worked as a CIA analyst. It appears that she was furious at the failure of the operational side at the Agency to produce evidence
which would have established that Iran did indeed have an ongoing nuclear programme, and she may well have hoped would implicate
Russia in supplying materials.
There are grounds to suspect that one of the things that Berezovsky and Shvets were doing was fabricating such 'evidence.' Whether
Levinson was involved in such attempts, or genuinely looking for evidence he was convinced must be there, I cannot say. It appears
that he fell for a rather elementary entrapment operation – which could well have been organised with the collaboration of Russian
intelligence. (People do get fed up with being framed, particular if 'régime change' is the goal.)
It also seems likely that, quite possibly in a different but related entrapment operation, related to propaganda wars in which
claims and counter claims about a polonium-beryllium 'initiator' as the crucial missing part which might make a 'suitcase nuke' functional,
Litvinenko accidentally ingested fatal quantities of polonium. A good deal of evidence suggests that this may have been at Berezovsky's
offices on the night before he was supposedly assassinated.
It was, obviously, important for Steele et al to ensure that nobody looked at the 'StratCom' wars about 'suitcase nukes.' Here,
a figure who has played a key role in such wars in relation to Syria plays an interesting minor one in the story.
Some time following the destruction of the case for an immediate war by the November 2007 NIE, a chemical weapons specialist called
Dan Kaszeta, who had worked in the White House for twelve years, moved to London.
In 2011, in addition to founding a consultancy called 'Strongpoint Security', he began a writing career with articles in 'CBRNe
World.' Later, he would become the conduit through which the notorious 'hexamine hypothesis', supposedly clinching proof that the
Syrian government was responsible for the sarin incidents at Khan Sheikhoun, Ghouta, Saraqeb, and Khan Al-Asal, was disseminated.
Having been forced by the threat of a case being opened against them under human rights law into resuming the inquest into Litvinenko's
death, in August 2012 the British authorities appointed Sir Robert Owen to conduct it. (There are many honest judges in Britain,
but obviously, if one sets out to find someone who will 'cover up' for the incompetence and corruption of people like Steele, as
Lord Hutton did before him, you can find them.)
That same month, a piece appeared in 'CBRNe World' with the the strapline: 'Dan Kaszeta looks into the ultimate press story: Suitcase
nukes', and the main title 'Carry on or checked bags?' Among the grounds he gives for playing down the scare:
'Some components rely on materials with shelf life. Tritium, for example, is used in many nuclear weapon designs and has a twelve
year half-life. Polonium, used in neutron initiators in some earlier types of weapon designs, has a very short halflife. US documents
state that every nuclear weapon has "limited life components" that require periodic replacement (do an internet search for nuclear
limited life components and you can read for weeks).'
What Kaszeta has actually described are the reasons why polonium is a perfect 'StratCom' instrument. In terms of scientific plausibility,
in fact there were no 'suitcase nukes', and in any case 'initiators' using polonium had been abandoned very early on, in favour of
ones which lasted longer.
For 'StratCom' scenarios, as experience with the 'hexamine hypothesis' has proved, scientific plausibility can be irrelevant.
What polonium provides is a means of suggesting that Al Qaeda have in fact got hold of a nuclear device which they could easily
smuggle into, say, Rome or New York, or indeed Moscow, but there is a crucial missing component which the FSB is trying to provide
to them. By the same token, of course, that missing component could be depicted as one that Berezovsky and Litvinenko are conspiring
to suppl to the Chechen insurgents.
In addition, the sole known source of global supply is the Avangard plant at Sarov in Russia, so the substance is naturally suited
for 'StratCom' directed against that country, which its intelligence services would – rather naturally – try to make 'boomerang.'
According to Glenn Simpson, Christopher Steele is a 'boy scout.' This seems to me quite wrong – but, even if it were true, would
you want to unleash a 'boy scout' into these kinds of intrigue?
As it is not clear why Kaszeta introduced his – accurate but irrelevant – point about polonium into an article which was concerned
with scientific plausibility, one is left with an interesting question as to whether he cut his teeth on 'StratCom' attempting to
ensure that nobody seriously interested in CBRN science followed an obvious lead.
In relation to the question of whether current FBI personnel had been involved in the kind of 'StratCom' exercises, I have been
describing, a critical issue is the involvement of Shvets and Levinson in the Alexander Khonanykhine affair back in the 'Nineties,
and the latter's use of claims about the Solntsevskaya to prevent the key figure's extradition. But that is a matter for another
A corollary of all this is that we cannot – yet at least – be absolutely confident that the account in the Nunes memo, according
to which Steele was suspended and then dismissed as an FBI source for what the organisation is reported to define as 'the most serious
of violations' – the unauthorised disclosure of a relationship with the organisation – is necessarily wholly accurate.
Who did and did not authorise which disclosures to the media, up to and including the extraordinary decision to have the full
dossier, including claims about Aleksej Gubarev and the Alfa oligarchs, in flagrant disregard of the obvious risks of defamation
suits, and who may be trying to pass the buck to others, remains I think less than totally clear.
thanks david... fascinating overview and conjecture..
it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy
and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep..
That Newsweek piece about Levinson is very superficial to me.
# Who suggested to who 'first' the Iran caper...Anne Jablonski to Levinson or Levinson to Jablonski? It was reported earlier
by Meier that in December 2005, when Levinson was pitching Jablonski on projects he might take on when his CIA contract was approved
he sent her a lengthy memo about Dawud's potential as an informant.
# Ira Silverman, the Iran hating NBC guy, pitched a Iraq caper to Levinson with Dawud Salahuddin, as his Iran contact and Levinson
went to Jablonski with it.
# And what was with Boris Birshstein, a Russian organized crime figure who had fled to Israel and Oleg Deripaska, the "aluminum
czar" of Russia whose organized crime contacts have kept him from entering the United States jumping in to help find Levinson?
The FBI allowed Deripaska in for two visits in 2009 in exchange for his alleged help in locating Levinson but obviously nothing
came of it.
I think there were more little agents/agendas in this than Levinson and Jablonski and US CIA.
As usual a wonderful analysis. I admire your insight, integrity and courage. I wish you could write more on why the Borg
is so much against Trump, even though they have Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference for them.
I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anglo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive
solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area. " It is an open secret that
the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields.
Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have
been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence".
"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements
in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign
policy agenda for a very long time. "
David as usual fascinating work connecting the dots. One question that comes to my mind is about the above point you are making.
Is it your understanding or believe that these IC individuals on both side of Atlantic, are pursuing/forcing their (on behalf
of the Borg) foreign policy agenda outside of their respected seating governments? If not, why is it that incoming administration
cannot stop them? So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but
I am not David Habakkuk, obviously. But I will venture a little opinion anyway. It is not enough that the Borgists get their
policy preferences. If it were, then Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference would be enough for them.
It is the very FACT of Trump even getting elected at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing
themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace
to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of
defiance which they will not tolerate.
And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear.
That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to
defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that.
So that is why the Borg cares so much. They view the Trump election as an insurgency, and they view themselves as waging a
counterinsurgency, which they dare not lose.
Thanks for your analysis. I always enjoy and learn from your posts. I wish you would post more often.
In my non-expert opinion, the Borg and the media were all in for Hillary. They were convinced that she was gonna win. To curry
favor with the Empress who would be certainly crowned after the election they were eager and convinced that their lawlessness
would become a badge for promotion and plum positions in her administration. In their conceit, they believed they could kill two
birds with one stroke. They could vilify Putin and create the mass hysteria to checkmate him, while at the same time disparage
and frame Trump as The Manchurian Candidate to seal their certain electoral victory.
Unfortunately for them voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin didn't buy their sales pitch despite the overwhelming
media barrage from all corners. Even news publications who have only endorsed Republican candidates for President for over a century
Trump's election win caused panic among the political establishment, the media and the Deep State. They were already all-in.
Their only choice was to double down and get Trump impeached. Now their conspiracy is beginning to unravel. They are doing everything
possible to forestall their Armageddon. Of course they have many allies. This battle is gonna be interesting to watch. Trump is
clearly getting many Congressional Republicans on side as his base of Deplorables remains solidly behind him. That is what's befuddling
the Borg pundits.
So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.
Because it is not possible to do on fundamental level yet, especially with US foreign policy establishment and so called
consensus being built almost entirely, in ideological and, most importantly, cadres senses, on the ultimate exceptionalist agenda
in which Russia is the ultimate obstacle and enemy. Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp.
This swamp (Borg, deep state, etc.) still thinks that it can use Cold War 1.0 Playbook and address very real and dangerous
American economic issues. They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with.
You are right CWII is very much desired and on agenda, but i am not sure of setup, the setup/board has been changed tremendously
and IMO benefits the Asian side of Bosphorus, for one thing technology is no longer exclusive, and financial burden is heavier
on atlantic side.
''Establishment in saturated with neocons and likes. They are the swamp. ''
The locust keep trying and trying, destruction is their life's work.
'1977-1981: Nationalities Working Group Advocates Using Militant Islam Against Soviet Union'
In 1977 Zbigniew Brzezinski, as President Carter's National Security Adviser, forms the Nationalities Working Group (NWG)
dedicated to the idea of weakening the Soviet Union by inflaming its ethnic tensions. The Islamic populations are regarded
as prime targets. Richard Pipes, the father of Daniel Pipes, takes over the leadership of the NWG in 1981. Pipes predicts that
with the right encouragement Soviet Muslims will "explode into genocidal fury" against Moscow. According to Richard Cottam, a
former CIA official who advised the Carter administration at the time, after the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1978, Brzezinski
favored a "de facto alliance with the forces of Islamic resurgence, and with the Republic of Iran." [Dreyfuss, 2005, pp. 241,
251 - 256]
'November 1978-February 1979: Some US Officials Want to Support Radical Muslims to Contain Soviet Union'
State Department official Henry Precht will later recall that Brzezinski had the idea "that Islamic forces could be used
against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the
Soviets." [Scott, 2007, pp. 67] In November 1978, President Carter appointed George Ball head of a special White House Iran task
force under Brzezinski. Ball recommends the US should drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the radical Islamist opposition
of Ayatollah Khomeini. This idea is based on ideas from British Islamic expert Dr. Bernard Lewis, who advocates the balkanization
of the entire Muslim Near East along tribal and religious lines. The chaos would spread in what he also calls an "arc of crisis"
and ultimately destabilize the Muslim regions of the Soviet Union
"There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements
in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign
policy agenda for a very long time."
Yes, that is what appears to be just what is coming to light. I wonder just what position Trey Gowdy is going to have since
he won't be running for re-election. The rage from the left is palpable. I'm sure the next outraged guy on the left will know
how to shoot straighter than the ones who shot up Congressman Scalise or the concert goers at Mandalay Bay.
"They are wrong, since most of them didn't read the playbook correctly to start with."
-- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders."
Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.
England preferred NAZI Germany to USSR, this is well known. As to what would have happened, the outcome of the war, in my opinion,
did not depend on US participation in the European Theatre. All of Europe would have become USSR satellite or joined USSR.
Yes, US was the first country to proudly deliver Manpads to be used by "rebels" (Mojahadin later Taleban) against USSR in Afghanistan
back in 80s. And, as per the architect of support for the rebels (Zbigniew Brzezinski) very proud of it with no regret. With that
in mind, I don't see how western politicians, the western governments and their related proxy war planers, will be regretting,
even sadden, once god forbid we see passenger planes with loved ones are shot down taking off or landing at various western airports
and other places around the word. Just like how superficialy with crocodile tears in their eyes they acted in aftermath of the
terrorist events in various western cities in this past 16 years. Gods knows what will happens to us if the opposite side start
to supply his own proxies with lethal anti air weapons. "Proudly", I don't think anybody in west cares or will regret of such
I think it likely that what Meier produces is only a 'limited hangout', and am hoping that when the book arrives it will contain
It is important to be clear that one is often dealing with people playing very complicated double games.
An interesting document is the 'Petition for Writ of Habeus Corpus' made on behalf of Khodorkovsky's close associate Alexander
Konanykhin back in 1997,when the Immigration and Naturalization Service were – apparently at least – cooperating with Russian
attempts to get hold of him. An extract:
'During the immigration hearing FBI SA Robert Levinson, an INS witness, confirmed that in 1992 Petitioner was kidnapped and
afterwards pursued by assassins of the Solntsevskaya organized criminal group. This organized criminal group is reportedly the
largest and the most influential organized criminal group in Russia, and operates internationally.'
Note the similarities between the 'StratCom' that Khonanykin and his associates were producing in the 'Nineties, and that which
Simpson and his associates have been producing two decades later.
Another useful example is provided by a 2004 item in the 'New American Magazine', reproduced on Konanykhin's website:
'One of those who testified on behalf of Konanykhine was KGB defector Yuri Shvets, who declared: "I have a firsthand knowledge
on similar operations conducted by the KGB." Konanykhine had brought trouble on himself, Shvets continued, when he "started bringing
charges against people who were involved with him in setting up and running commercial enterprises. They were KGB people secretly
smuggling from Russia hundreds of millions of dollars . This is [a] serious case, and I know that KGB ... desperately wants to
win this case, and everybody who won't step to their side would face problems."'
So – 'first hand knowledge', from a Ukrainian nationalist – look at what the Chalupas have been doing, it seems not much has
For a rather different perspective on what Konanykhin had actually been up to, from someone in whose honesty – if not always
judgement – I have complete confidence, see the testimony of Karon von Gerhke-Thompson to the House Committee on Banking and Financial
Services hearings on Russian Money Laundering. In this, she described how she had been approached by him in 1993:
'"Konanykhine alleged that Menatep Bank controlled $1.7bn [£1bn] in assets and investment portfolios of Russia's most prominent
political and social elite," she recalled. She said he wanted to move the bank's assets off shore and asked her to help buy foreign
passports for its "very, very special clients".
'In her testimony to the committee Ms Von Gerhke-Thompson said she informed the CIA of the deal, and the agency told her that
it believed Mr Konanykhine and Mr Khodorkovsky "were engaged in an elaborate money laundering scheme to launder billions of dollars
stolen by members of the KGB and high-level government officials".
Coming back to Steele's 'StratCom', in July 2008, an item appeared on the 'Newnight' programme of the BBC – which some of us
think should by then have been rechristened the 'Berezovsky Broadcasting Corporation' – in which the introduction by the presenter,
Jeremy Paxman, read as follows:
'Good evening. The New Russian President, Dmitri Medvedev, was all smiles and warm words when he met Gordon Brown today. He
said he was keen to resolve all outstanding difficulties between the two countries. Yada yada yada. Gordon Brown smiled, but he
must know what Newsnight can now reveal: that MI5 believes the Russian state was involved in the murder of Alexander Litvinenko
by radioactive poisoning. They also believe that without their intervention another London-based Russian, Boris Berezovsky, would
have been murdered. Our diplomatic editor, Mark Urban, has this exclusive report.'
When Urban repeated the claims on his blog, there was a positive eruption from someone using the name 'timelythoughts', about
the activities of someone she referred to as 'Berezovsky's disinformation specialist' – when I came across this later, it was
immediately clear to me that she was Karon von Gerhke, and he was Shvets.
She then described a visit by Scaramella to Washington, details of which had already been unearthed by my Italian collaborator,
David Loepp. Her claim to have e-mails from Shvets, from the time immediately prior to Litvinenko's death, directly contradicting
the testimony he had given, fitted with other evidence I had already unearthed.
Later, we exchanged e-mails over a quite protracted period, and a large amount of material that came into my possession as
a result was submitted by me to the Inquest team, with some of it being used in posts on the 'European Tribune' site.
What I never used publicly, because I could only partially corroborate it from the material she provided, was an extraordinary
claim about Shvets:
'He was responsible for bringing in a Kremlin initiative that was walked Vice President Cheney's office on a US government
quid pro quo with the Kremlin FSB SVR involving the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky – a cease and desist on allegations of a politically
motivated arrest of Khodorkovsky, violations of rules of law and calls from Russia's expulsion from the G 8 in exchange for favorable
posturing of U.S. oil companies on Gazprom's Shtokman project and intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq,
Iran and Syria, all documented in reports I submitted to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and MI6.
'Berezovsky's DS could not be on both sides on that isle. His Kremlin FSB SVR sources had been vetted by the CIA and by the
National Security Council. They proved to be as represented. As we would later learn, however, he was on Berezovsky's payroll
at same time. The FSB SVR general he was coordinating the Kremlin initiative through was S. R. Subbotin, the same FSB SVR general
who was investigating Berezovsky's money laundering operations in Switzerland during the same timeframe. His FSB SVR sources surrounding
Putin were higher than any Lugovoy could have ever hoped to affiliate with.
'R. James Woolsey (former CIA DCI), Marshall Miller (former law partner of the late CIA DCI William Colby), who I coordinated
the Kremlin initiative through that Berezovsky's DS had brought in were shocked to learn that he was affiliated with Berezovsky
and Litvinenko. He was in Berezovsky's inner circle and engaged in vetting Russian business with Litvinenko. He operated Berezovsky's
Ukraine website, editing and dubbing the now infamous Kuchma tapes throughout the lead up to the elections in the Ukraine. Berezovsky
contributed $41 million to Viktor Yushchenko's campaign, which he used in an attempt to force Yushchenko to reunite with Julia
Tymoschenko. It failed but would succeed later after Berezovsky orchestrated a public relations initiative through Alan Goldfarb
in the U.S. on behalf of Tymoschenko.'
Having got to know Karon von Gerhke quite well, and also been able to corroborate a great deal of what she told me about many
things, and discussed these matters with her, it is absolutely clear to me that she was neither fabricating nor fantasising. What
later became apparent, both to her and to me, was that in the 'double game' that Shvets was playing, he had succeeded in fooling
her as to the side for which he was working.
It seems likely however that the reason Shvets could do what he did was that quite precisely that many high-up people in the
Kremlin and elsewhere were playing a 'double game.' In this, Karon von Gerhke's propensity for indiscretion – of which I, like
others, was both beneficiary and victim – could be useful.
An exercise in 'positioning', which could be used to disguise the fact that Shvets was indeed 'Berezovsky's disinformation
specialist', could be used to make it appear that 'intelligence on weapon sales during the Yeltsin era to Iraq, Iran and Syria'
was actually credible.
This could have been used to try to rescue Cheney, Bush and their associates from the mess they had got into as a result of
the failure of the invasion to provide any evidence whatsoever supporting the case which had been made for it. It could also have
been used to provide the kind of materials justifying military action against Iran for which Levinson and Jablonski were looking,
and for similar action against Syria.
Among reasons for bringing this up now is that we need to make sense of the paradox that Simpson – clearly in collusion with
Steele – was using Mogilevich and the 'Solnsetskaya Bratva' both against Manafort and Trump and against Browder.
There are various possible explanations for this. I do not want to succumb to my instinctive prejudice that this may have been
another piece of 'positioning', similar to what I think was being done with Shvets, but the hypothesis needs to be considered.
A more general point is that people in Washington and London need to 'wise up' to the kind of world with which they are dealing.
This could be done quite enjoyably: reading some of Dashiell Hammett's fictions of the United States in the Prohibition era, or
indeed buying DVDs of some of the classics of 'film noir', like 'Out of the Past' (in its British release, 'Build My Gallows High')
might be a start.
Very much of the coverage of affairs in the post-Soviet space since 1991 has read rather as though a Dashiell Hammett story
had been rewritten by someone specialising in sentimental children's, or romantic, fiction (although, come to think of it, that
is really what Brigid O'Shaughnessy does in 'The Maltese Falcon.')
The testimony of Glenn Simpson seems a case in point. The sickly sentimentality of these people does, rather often, make one
feel as though one wanted to throw up.
"They act and believe that they are Olympians. You have to wait for them to age and die before any substantive change in Fortress
West's posture; say 2040.}
No, three years at tops and could be much sooner if dimes starting dropping by exposed people that don't want to take the
fall for their superiors whom they always detested. One possible thing to get the process started sooner is if the recent Russian
Intelligence delegation to DC that Smoothie mentions on another thread gave the current administration, as a diplomatic courtesy
of course, the audio recordings of Madame Sectary Nuland's infamous mental meltdown at Kaliningrad. No telling what beans were
spilled in her moment of panic, but I am willing to bet key names were dropped. Either way the time is coming.
- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders."
Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.
My coming book is precisely about that. Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George
Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons.
Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it
is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat
it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing.
Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered
a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving
forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before
any Steele's Dossier. This was a program.
I read the post and responses early on, so forgive me if this point has been addressed in the meantime. If the memo information
on non-disclosure of material evidence to the warrant issuing court is accurate, as soon as that information came to the attention
of the authorities (clearly some time ago) there was a duty on them (including the judge(s) who issued the warrants) to have the
matter brought back before the court toot sweet. If that had happened it would surely be in the public domain, so on the assumption
the prosecutors and maybe even the judge didn't see the need to review the matter, even purely on a contempt/ethics basis, the
memo information only seems convincing if the FISA system is a total sham. I really doubt that.
IMO, the bigger problem for American not shying away from wars, or being silent about them , is when your home, your mom and
dad' home, the town you grew up in, are immune and away from the war.
The security and safety of the two oceans, encourages or at least, in an all volunteer military makes it a secondary problem
for regular people, to worry about. As I remember that wasn't the case at the end of VN war when i first landed here. At
that time even though the war was on the other side of the planet and away from homeland, still people, especially young ones
in colleges were paying more attention to the cost of war.
Diana West has uncovered some interesting "Red Threads" (6 part article at dianawest-dot-net) on all the Fusion GPS folks. Seems
ole Russian speaking Nellie Ohr got herself a ham radio license recently. Wonder why she would suddenly need one of those? They
are all Marxists with potential connections back to Russia.
Been there. I am also a latecomer to SST. You have to read the back numbers. How? My IT expertise dates from the dawn of the internet
and was lamentable then but I find Wayback sometimes allows easier searches than the SST search engine. A straight search on google
also allows searches with more than one term. This link -
- gets you to a chronological list and for recent material is sometimes quicker than fiddling around with search engines. "Categories"
on the RH side is useful but then you don't get some very informative comments that cross-refer.
If those sadly elementary procedures fail resort to the nearest infant. There's a blur of fingers on the keyboard and what
you want then usually appears. Never ask them how they did it. They get so fed up when you ask them to explain it again.
"Who is David Habakkuk?" That's a quantum computer sited, from internal evidence you pick up from time to time, somewhere in
the Greater London area. Cross references like you wouldn't believe and over several fields, so maybe he's two quantum computers.
The "Borg"?. Try Wittgenstein. Likely a prog but you can't be choosy these days. Early on in "Philosophical Investigations"
(hope I get this right) he discusses the problem of how you can view as an entity something that has ill-defined or overlapping
boundaries. The "Borg" is that "you know it when you see it" sort of thing. A great merit of this site is that the owner and many
of the contributors know it from inside.
In general you may regard your new found site as a microcosm of the great battle that is raging in the West. It's a battle
between the (probably apocryphal but adequately stated) Roveian view of reality that regards truth as an adjunct to or as a by-product
of ideology and Realpolitik and the objective view of reality as something that is damned difficult to get at, and sometimes impossible,
but that has a truth in it somewhere that is independent of the views and convictions of the observer. It's a battle that's never
going to be won but unless it tilts back closer to common sense it can certainly be lost and the West with it.
Clearly the Labor Party in the UK preferred the USSR to Nazi Germany. (cepting that short interlude where the Soviets signed the
Agreement with Hitler, and the Left Organized Leadership all across Europe, for the most part, lined up with Hitler). But for
the most part, Labor was Left.
Elements (the ones that won out in the end) of the Conservative Party loathed both Hitler and Stalin. An element of the Conservative
Party was sympathetic, but only up to a certain point, with the Nazis. This ended in 1939, sept.
So I don't think it fair, or accurate, to say 'England prefered the Nazis....and even if it not those things, it certainly
not "well known", except to the people who have used the false premise to butter their wounds from supporting Stalin in his Pact
with Hitler. Or are inclined to bash the British in general.
jonst That's broadly accurate, but specifically Attlee brought the motion of no confidence in Chamberlain, which the conservative
appeasers won but which led to Churchill's opportunity. Attlee was essential in cabinet to Churchill's resistance after the retreat
of the BEF.
What are you doing here? You said you dislike the military. Are you really in the Spanish Basque country? Bilbao maybe? break
- David Habakkuk is a private scholar of the Litvinenko murder and Soviet/Russian politics and intelligence affairs. His surname
comes from Wales where in the 18th (?) Century the ancestral village were all "chapel" and changed their surnames to Old Testament
names. His father was master of one of the Cambridge colleges and David is himself a graduate of Cambridge. pl
The hard, blinding truth:
"In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it,
and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting
their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations." – Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
This troll showed up recently at b's place doing the same accusations. There is group that is running sacred and pulling out
all the stops in "info ops" side of the spectrum. The damn fools don't or, most probably, won't get thru their thick heads and
even thicker hearts that it is a failed strategy that turns bystanders into their opponents.
Here for your edification is the definitive analysis of the GOP memo by Alexander Mercouris over at The Duran.
And it is a masterpriece - and quite long, possibly his longest analysis of anything so far. He buries the counterarguments
being passed around by the Democratic opposition and the anti-Trump media.
Mercouris writes on legal affairs alongside his foreign policy stuff and he writes with a lawyer's precision. And in this article
he points out that the GOP memo is writter as a legal document - probably by Trey Gowdy - with additional political insertions
by Nunes. So it should properly be referred to as the "GOP memo" or the "Gowdy memo", not the Nunes memo."
Why this is important is that the GOP memo is basically written as a defense lawyer would in contesting a case -- this case
being the FISA warrant application. Which means its orientation is proving failure to disclose relevant and material information
to the FISA court and in some cases rising to the point of contempt of court.
"Seeking transparency and cooperation should not be this challenging," Grassley said in a statement after posting a heavily
redacted version of the criminal referral that he and GOP Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina sent to the Justice Department
last month. " The government should not be blotting out information that it admits isn't secret. "
I suppose DOJ/FBI believe that by obstructing, stalling and obfuscating they can buy time and that the Republicans in Congress
will get tired of the games and go home. This seems like a pretty straightforward memo, highlighting the discrepancy between Steele's
court filings and the FBI's version of Steele's discussions with them. Grassley is pointing out that either Steele or the FBI
What is interesting is the difference in process and ability between the House & Senate. The House can release their memos
on its own, even if not declassified by the Executive, whereas the Senate requires the Executive to declassify it's memos that
are based on classified documents.
We have not had a self declared communist on SST before although LeaNder in her youth may have come close to that exalted status.
You might want to read the wiki on me and the CV I have posted on the blog to avoid tedious accusations of this or that. I am
thought by some to have some knowledge of the ME so please do not try to lecture me about how much you love the Arabs. I speak
their language and have lived with them for a long time. There are people who write to SST who are pro-Trump and some who are
anti-Trump. I seek a mixture of views so long as personal insult and invective are eschewed. Personally, I do not belong to a
political party and would describe myself as an original intent, strict constructionist.
Trump is the constitutionally and legally elected president of the United States. Your descriptors with regard to him are,
in my opinion, only plausible if seen from the point of view of various kinds of leftist including Marxist-Leninists like you.
You sound very smug and self-satisfied but we will see if you can have an open mind at all. pl
Found him, Ali Babacan XVPM, XFM and M of finance. Yes god forbid, if he is a decendent of Ardisher Babakan and another claimant
to Iranian throne, which CIA and Soros can jump on. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Babacan MBA from
I do not believe Trump is a misogynists - he stated publicly that he likes beautiful women. I also do not think he is a racist.
I think he is the first US leader in many decades who has been willing to publicly talk about US problems. For most other US politicians
- they largely live in "the best of all possible worlds".
Colonel - sincere apologies if my comment above disrupted the discussion on a fascinating article.
David Habakkuk - I should say that "Quantum Computer" referred solely to the ability to gather and collate great amounts of
material. It's an ability I admire. On Steele, you are among other things setting out something that is unfamiliar to me though
not to most others here, I imagine, and that is the milieu in which he is or was working as a UK Intelligence operative. That
you have also done in previous articles; it doesn't seem to be a particularly savoury milieu. As far as Steele's US activities
are concerned, from you I'm not getting the picture of a lone operative, all ties with MI6 neatly severed, working solo in the
States on some chance assignment in 2016. I'm getting the picture of someone still very much in the swim and selected because
The only problem with that second picture is the dossier, or the 30% or so of it - what Comey, I think it was, described as
"salacious and unverified". Surely that's got to be amateur night. Not something that a practised professional working with other
professionals would put his hand to. Does that not support the picture of an ex-operative who's gone off the rails and is fumbling
The Steele affair touched a nerve. One is always I suppose aware that IC professionals are getting up to all sorts and it doesn't
seem improbable that "all sorts" includes political stuff and smear campaigns. But it's not heaps of corpses in Syria or farm
boys being sent to certain death in the Ukraine. And even within the UK Intelligence Community and their contractors or whatever
they're called, compared with what our IC people have done in the ME or compared with what one fears Hamish de Bretton Gordon
might have got himself involved in, Christopher Steele's just a choirboy. Nevertheless there's something deeply repellent about
what he did. Whatever your view of Trump there he was, newly elected, obviously wanting to make a go of it, and already faced
with difficulties. Then some chancer throws "Golden Showers" in his face and makes his position, not maybe for the insiders but
for the general public, that bit more untenable.
So from a UK perspective the question of whether Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK becomes important. If he
was truly working solo then that from a UK point of view is regrettable but one of those things. In that case MI6 would just have
to tighten up its controls on what ex-operatives get up to, put out the appropriate disclaimers, and that's the end of it as far
as the UK is concerned. But if Golden Showers and the rest of it was a "Welcome Mr President" from UK IC professionals as a group
then those professionals should be hung drawn and quartered together with whoever set them on.
I've read your article several times now and apart from the fact that much of what you pull together isn't material I'm up
on, it doesn't seem to me that you're definitely coming to one conclusion or the other. There are many more facts to come out
so perhaps this question is premature, but do you think Steele was acting in concert with others in the UK or was he, at least
as far as the UK is concerned, working solo?
Most Iranian females Named Fatima/ Fatimah after prophet' daughter, call themselves Fati, and if they are of aristocrat type,
they are called Bibi Fati Khanam, which is honorable lady Fati and if they are westernized they become Fay or Fifi.
Colonel - Further apologies - I should have submitted comment 79 as two items.
Yes, the question about Steele was in response to DH's article. The UK side of the affair is I suppose only a small part of
the question you and your Committee are examining but it's a dubious part however one looks at it. Although it's early days yet
I was hoping DH, with his encyclopaedic knowledge of the UK intelligence scene, might feel able to cast more light on that UK
Cortes - " ... where, exactly, do you expect the great public to look beyond the initial scabrously defamatory storytelling about
the "golden showers"? "
I don't think one can expect the public, at least in the UK, to look very far beyond the initial scandal. The investigations
and enquiries presently under way in the US are complex and are taking place in a different system. This member of the UK public
wouldn't be able to give you a coherent account of those enquiries and I doubt many of my fellows could.
So we have to take on trust, most of us, what we're told. As far as I can tell the underlying theme from the BBC and the media
is generally that Trump is subverting the American Justice system in order to ensure his own misdemeanours aren't investigated.
Some of us take that as gospel. Others of us assume that the politicians and the media are untrustworthy and ignore them. I
doubt many of us go into much more detail than that. Therefore the original story will stick in our minds.
But for some in the UK there are questions in there as well. How come the UK got mixed up in all this? How much did the UK
get mixed up in it?
When I belatedly started looking at the Litvinenko mystery, as a result of a strange email provoked by comments of mine on
SST which arrived in my inbox in March 2007 from someone who turned out to be a key protagonist, it was rather obvious that improvised
and chaotic 'StratCom' operations had been put into place on both the Russian and British sides to cover up what had happened.
A particular interesting feature of those on the British side – in which we now know Christopher Steele must have played
a leading role – were the bizarre gyrations those responsible were going through trying to explain away the extraordinary fact
that when he had broken the story of his poisoning, Litvinenko had pointed the finger of suspicion at his Italian associate Mario
When I started delving, I came across some very interesting pieces on Scaramella and related matters posted on the 'European
Tribune' website by a Rome-based blogger using the name 'de Gondi' in the period after the story broke.
His actual name is David Loepp, by profession he is an artisan jeweller specialising in ancient and traditional goldsmith techniques,
and I already knew and respected his work from his contributions to the transnational internet investigation into the Niger uranium
forgeries – an earlier MI6 clusterf**ck.
So in May 2008 I posted a longish piece on that site, setting out the problems with the evidence about the Litvinenko case
as I saw them, in the hope of reactivating his interest. This paid off in spades, when he linked to, and translated a key extract
from, the request from Italian prosecutors to use wiretaps of conversations with Senator Paolo Guzzanti in connection with their
prosecution of Scaramella for 'aggravated calumny.'
The request, which up to not so long ago was freely available on the website of the Italian Senate, was denied, but the extensive
summaries of the transcripts provided a lot of material.
The extract from the wiretap request which David Loepp posted, which like Litvinenko's letter containing the claims he and
Yuri Shvets had concocted about Putin using Mogilevich to attempt to supply Al Qaeda with a 'mini nuclear bomb' is dated 1 December
2005, contains key pointers to the conspiracy. It concludes:
'A passage on Simon Moghilevic and an agreement between the camorra to search for nuclear weapons lost during the Cold War
to be consigned to Bin Laden, a revelation made by the Israeli. According to Scaramella the circle closes: camorra, Moghilevic-
Russian mafia- services- nuclear bombs in Naples.'
Subsequent conversations make clear that Scaramella left on 6 December 2005 for Washington, on a trip where he was to meet
Shvets. The summary of a report on this to Guzzanti reads:
'12) conversation that took place on number [omissis] on December 18, 2005, at 9:41:51 n. 1426, containing explicit references
to the authenticity of the declarations of Alexander Litvinenko acquired by Scaramella, to the trustworthiness of the affirmations
made by Scaramella in his reports to the commission and to the meetings Scaramella had with Talik after having denounced them
[presumably Talik and his alleged accomplices]. (They can talk with HEIMS thanks to the help of MILLER. SHVEZ says that he had
been a companion of CARLOS at the academy; SHVEZ has already made declarations and is willing to continue collaboration. Guzzanti
warns that a document in Russian arrived in commission in which the name of SCARAMELLA appears several times, these [sic] say
that directives to the contrary had been given to Litvinenko. Scaramella says that he went to the meeting with TALIK in the company
of two treasury [police] and a cop, Talik spoke of a person from the Ukrainian GRU who would be willing to talk and a strange
Chechen ring in Naples. Assassination attempt against the pope, CASAROLI was a Soviet agent.)'
The summary of a later conversation also refers to 'MILLER':
'conversation that took place on number [omissis] on January 13, 2006, at 11:22:11 n. 2287, containing references to Scaramella's
sources in relation to facts referred in the Commission, the means by which they were obtained by Scaramella from declarations
made abroad, the role of Litvinenko, also on the occasion of declarations made by third parties and the credibility of the news
and theses given by Scaramella to the commission (Scaramella reads a text in English on the relation between the KGB and PRODI.
Guzzanti asks if its credibility can be confirmed and if the taped declarations can be backed up; Scaramella answers that there
were two testimonies, Lou Palumbo and Alexander (Litvinenko), and that the registration made in London at the beginning of the
assignment [Scaramella's?] had been authenticated by a certain BAKER of the FBI. As he translates the text from English, Scaramella
notes that the person testifying does not say he knows Prodi but only that he thinks that Prodi ...; all those who worked for
the person testifying in Scandinavia said that Prodi was "theirs." The affair in Rimini, Bielli is preparing the battle in Rimini.
Meetings with MILLER for the three things that are needed. Polemic about Pollari over the pressure exerted on Gordievski.)'
In the exchanges on my May 2008 post, I mentioned and linked to some extraordinary comments on a crucial article by Edward
Jay Epstein, in which Karon von Gerhke claimed that his sceptical account fitted with what her contacts in the British investigation
had told her. When that July I came across her equally extraordinary claims in response to the BBC's Mark Urban piece of stenography
– which Steele may also have had a hand in organising – I found she was referring to precisely that visit to Washington by Scaramella
which had been described in the wiretap request.
As you can perhaps imagine, the fact that 'Miller' had featured in the conversations with Guzzanti both as a key contact, who
could introduce Scaramella to Aldrich Ames (which is who 'Heims' clearly is), and with whom there had been meetings about 'the
three things that are needed' made me inclined to take seriously what Karon von Gerhke said about his role.
In December 2008, I put up another post on 'European Tribune', putting together the material from David Loepp and that from
Karon von Gerhke – but not discussing the references to 'Miller.' As I had hoped, this led to her getting in touch.
Among the material with which she supplied me, which I in turn supplied to the Solicitor to the Inquest, were covers of faxes
to John Rizzo, then Acting General Counsel of the CIA. From a fax dated 23 October 2005.
'John: See attached email to Chuck Patrizia. Berezovsky alleges he is in possession of a copy of a classified file given to
the CIA by Russia's FSB, which he further alleges the CIA disseminated to British, French, Italian and Israeli intelligence agencies
implicating him in business associations with the Mafia and to ties with terrorist organizations. Yuri Shvets was authorised/directed
by Berezovsky to raise the issue with Bud McFarlane scheduled for Thursday. McFarlane is unaware the issue will be raised with
From a fax dated 7 November 2005:
'John: I am attaching an email exchange between Yuri Shvets and me re: 1) article he published on his Ukraine website on alleged
sale of nuclear choke to Iran, which I reproached him on as having been planted by Berezovsky and 2 the alleged FSB/CIA document
file that Berezovsky obtained from Scaramella, which Yuri acknowledges in his e-mail to me. Like extracting wisdom teeth to get
him to put anything on paper, especially in an e-mail! [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is the source McFarlane referred Yuri to re:
Berezovsky's visa issue. She proposed meeting Berezovsky in London. Alleged it would take a year to clear up USG issues and even
then could not guarantee him a visa. She too has access to USG intelligence on Berezovsky. Open book.'
From a fax dated 5 December 2005:
'John. From Mario Scaramella to Yuri Shvets to my ears, the DOJ has authorised Mario Scaramella to interview Aldrich Ames with
regard to members of the Italian Intelligence Service agent recruited by Ames for the KGB. Scaramella, as you may recall, is who
gave Boris Berezovsky's aide, a former FSB Colonel [LITVINENKO – DH], that alleged document number to the FSB file that the CIA
disseminated on Berezovsky – a file that Bud McFarlane's "Madam Visa" [NAME REDACTED BY ME – DH] is alleged is totting off to
London for a meeting with Berezovsky, who has agreed to retain her re: his visa issue. Quid pro quo's with Berezovsky and Scaramella
on the CIA agent currently facing kidnapping charges for the rendition of the Muslim cleric? Scott Armstrong has a most telling
file on Scaramella. Not a single redeeming quality.'
In the course of very extensive exchanges with Karon von Gerhke subsequently, we had some rather acute disagreements. It was
unfortunate that her filing was a shambles – a crucial hard disk failed without a backup, and the 'hard copies' appeared to be
in a chaotic state.
However, the only occasion when I can recall having reason to believe that was deliberately lying to me was when David Loepp
unearthed a cache of documentation including the full Italian text of the letter from Litvinenko containing the 'StratCom' designed
to suggest that Putin had attempted to supply a 'mini nuclear bomb' to Al Qaeda. Having been asked to keep this between ourselves
for the time being, Karon insisted on immediately sending it to her contacts in Counter Terrorism Command, and then produced bogus
Time and again, moreover, I found that I could confirm statements that she made – see for example the two posts I put up on
the legal battles following the death in February 2008 of Berezovsky's long-term partner Arkadi 'Badri' Patarkatsishvili in June
and July 2009, which were based on careful corroboration of what she told me.
(I should also say that I acquired the greatest respect for her courage.)
And while Owen and his team suppressed all the evidence from her, and almost all of that from David Loepp, which I had I provided
to them, the dossier about Berezovsky is described in a statement made by Litvinenko in Tel Aviv in April 2006, presented in evidence
in the Inquiry.
Other evidence, moreover, strongly inclines me to believe that there were overtures for a 'quid pro quo', purporting to come
from Putin, but that this was a ruse orchestrated by Berezovsky.
Part of the purpose of this would almost certainly have been to supply probably bogus 'evidence' about arms sales in the Yeltsin
years to Iraq, Iran and Syria. Moreover, I think there was an article on the second 'Fifth Element' site run by Shvets about the
supposed sale of a nuclear 'choke' – whatever that is – to Iran.
The likelihood of the involvement of elements in the FBI in these shenanigans seems to quite high, given what has already emerged
about the activities of Levinson. Also relevant may be the fact that the 'declaration' which was part of the attempt to frame
Romano Prodi was authenticated, in London, by 'a certain BAKER of the FBI.')
I know something of spectroscopy. The critical issue here is the provenance of the samples and not the sophistication of the techniques used in the analysis
itself or its instrumentation. The paragraph that you have quoted:
"To figure out signatures based on various synthetic routes and conditions, Chipuk says that the synthetic chemists on his
team will make the same chemical threat agent as many as 2,000 times in an ..." reeks of intellectual intimidation - trying to
brow-beat any skeptic by the size of one's instrument - as it were."
And then there is a little matter of confidence level in any of the analysis - such things are normally based on prior statistics
- which did not and could not exist in this situation.
David, it's no doubt interesting to watch how attention on Victor Ivanov in another deficient inquiry on the British Isles, was
managed in that inquiry. If I may, since he pops up again in the Steele dossier. You take what's available? Is that all there
is to know?
I know its hard to communicate basics if you are deeply into matters. Usually people prefer to opt out. It's getting way too
complicated for them to follow. You made me understand this experience. But isn't this (fake) intelligence continuity "via" Yuri
Svets what connects your, no harm meant I do understand your obsession with the case, with what we deal with now in the Steele
Dossier? Again, one of the most central figures is Ivanov.
Of course later reports in the Steele Dossier go hand in hand with a larger public relations campaign. Creating reality?
Irony alert: as informer/source I would by then know what the other side wants to hear.
By the way, babbling mode, I found your Tom Mangold transcription. It felt it wasn't there on the link you gave. I used the
date, and other search terms. Maybe I am wrong. Haven't looked at what the judge ruled out of the collection. Yes, cozy session/setting.
Tourists from many -- but not all -- foreign nations wishing to enter Kish Free Zone from legal ports are not required to
obtain any visa prior to travel. For those travelers, upon-arrival travel permits are stamped valid for 14 days by Kish officials.
Who are the not all? Can we assume Britain is not one of those? The German link is different. How about the Iranian? or isn't this the Kish we are talking about?
another Ivanov. I struggled with names (...) in Russian crime novels, admittedly. But that's long ago from times Russian crime
and Russian money flows and rogues getting hold of its nuclear material surfaced more often in Europe. 90s
That's a great interview that summarizes Russiagate in a very assessable way. This is exactly repetition of Iraq WDM and
subsequent cover up. The consequence is a new higher level of discreditation of neoliberal MSM, at least by Trump supporters They
will just ignore those bottomfeeders like Clapper and Brennan.
Endemic of Russophobia is the biggest net result of Russiagate. This is also a big election gift to Trump.
The Deep State did not view Trump as a reliable steward of neoliberal empire and that's why Russiagate was unleashed. And Trump
is an embarrassment to the empire, no questions about it.
MadCow spend two year rabidly promoting Russiagate nonsense and she still has her job. That's suggest whom she
serves. In other cased she would be discarded like used condom.
Chris Hedges discusses with Nation reporter Aaron Mate how despite the categorical statement in Robert Mueller's report that Donald
Trump and his campaign did not collude with Russia, the conspiracy theories by the nation's mainstream media show little sign of
We're all still waiting for MSDNC to bring on Aaron, Glenn Greenwald, Jimmy Dore, Michael Tracey and others on any of their
programs. MSDNC has not had on one single lefty who got this fraudulent and disgraceful Stalinesque political investigation right
from day one since December of 2016. Not one.
I've got to admit, I get a massive dopamine rush hearing these two sane, intelligent,critical thinkers, skillfully dissect
this convoluted quadrafuck that has wasted some much of our precious time. I literally feel washed clean for a moment.
"... Americans should be marching in the streets at this attempted coup but we are so doped with mindless entertainment that we no longer care. We are becoming a system where as long as you don't challenge the 2 party system you are allowed your freedom to make money and to say whatever you want so long as it doesn't have consequences. ..."
The irony of the Mueller investigation that was demanded by Democrats because they thought it would show Trump colluded with Russia
to win the Presidency is that it has blown up in their faces by exposing in greater detail how Obama and the Deep State attempted
first, to throw an election in favor of one candidate, Hillary Clinton, and second, attempted a coup once Trump was elected via
investigations and false claims.
Once Trump won the election, the Deep State used their accomplices in the msm to convince the American public that Donald J
Trump stole the election with the collaboration of the Russians. In this way they sought to remove him by impeachment.
It turns out the Deep State were the ones who were acting as agents of Russia seeking to tear America apart.
John Brennan, Obama's CIA director, by his own admission, played a key role in instigating the investigation of Trump before the
election. In the aftermath of the election Brennan has repeatedly called Trump a traitor on social media and old media.
We now know in August 2016 Brennan gave a private briefing to Sen. Harry Reid. Subsequently, Reid sent a letter to the FBI
which included info that clearly came from the now infamous dossier, manufactured by ex-British spy Christopher Steele and Fusion
GPS contractor. This dossier would later be included in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant application that
was used to justify investigations into Trump, his campaign, and his family. It now appears very likely Brennan later lied under
oath that he did not know who commissioned the dossier.
This dossier was originally funded by none other than Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party.
Since the conclusion of the Mueller report has come out Brennan, probably fearing an investigation into his actions pre/post
election, now says he had "bad information". A more accurate description might be that he was willfully spreading disinformation
to bring down a President.
James Comey himself described this dossier as "salacious" and "unverified" yet he did not bother to have the FBI attempt to
verify the contents of the dossier.
This didn't stop Comey from lying 4 times to the FISA court that ex-British spy Steele was the source of an article by "journalist"
Isikoff, which was used to corroborate claims in his own dossier. So Comey, in essence, told the FISA court that the Steele dossier had been corroborated by Steele.
Some background: Steele also worked for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska. So the only person who had any verifiable evidence
of working with the Russians in any capacity is an ex-British spy, contracted to manufacture a false dossier on behalf of Hillary
Clinton to smear Trump and later weaponized to impeach Trump after he won the election.
Comey lied to the FISA court so he could obtain, as he did, a warrant to spy on Carter Page (Trump staffer) and the Trump family
during the election. Moreover, in addition to Comey, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, former Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe, and
former Attorney General Sally Yates were required to sign off on the FISA warrant application. They are either incompetent or
were engaged in a conspiracy but regardless, this was a fraud on the FISA court.
Bruce Ohr, a senior official at the time at the Justice Department, acted as a middleman between the FBI and Steele. He passed
along information from his wife Nellie Ohr, also a Fusion GPS contractor like Steele , with, presumably, unverified and false
info regarding Trump and his campaign.
The FBI later terminated Steele's relationship as a confidential informant with them after he revealed this relationship to
the press. However, for up to 1.5 years after, Bruce Ohr continued to act as middleman between Steele and the FBI, even after
Mueller took over the investigation .
Americans should be marching in the streets at this attempted coup but we are so doped with mindless entertainment that
we no longer care. We are becoming a system where as long as you don't challenge the 2 party system you are allowed your freedom
to make money and to say whatever you want so long as it doesn't have consequences.
Any more details of Mueller's report due to be released by AG Barr are likely to reveal more of the rotted core of the Deep
State and their machinations and not, as Democrats think, damaging info about Trump.
Decades long "image" of London's spy school fall spectacularly apart, apparently it is not
populated with the high IQ, highly educated brass any more, average intelligence however
cannot play on international stage, script is poor, directing mediocre, inconsistencies and
deep holes in story negate logics...
it is time that London joins Washington, hand in hand,
like lowers to seek fortunes elsewhere, the prey is still to be found in oligarchs of
Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, Romania and the like places with spineless political caricatures.
Go London go...there is no fortune for you in EU...and by now you stench of your morals and
ethics reaches shores of smallest island on GMT+12 time scale.
It's been a year since the Salisbury incident. We still don't have the investigative
conclusion. We don't know who's responsible and how exactly the Skripals were poisoned or if
they were even poisoned at all. But international relations sure were poisoned. It appears that
our ambassador to Britain, the esteemed Alexander Yakovenko is a spy decorated with military
Why don't the Russians just lay out the facts of the story as told by the British? The
Brits story is so stupid it makes zero sense... According to the British media Skripal and
his daughter came into contact with "military grade" Novichok nerve agent and both
survived... Even though they said a tiny drop can be fatal... The poor woman who did die was
a homeless drug addict. Supposedly, her boyfriend found a bottle of "perfume" in a "perfume
box" that was in a trash receptacle. The boyfriend retrieved it from the waste bin and gave
it to to the unfortunate woman. She died. According to the British government, Russian spies
put the Novichok in the perfume bottle and planted the bottle in the trash bin so the
boyfriend would find it... Personally, I blame the death of the homeless woman on a "false
flag" operation run by British intelligence. Someone had to die. Why not an "expendable"?
Meanwhile, the Skripals remain under house arrest, cut off from the outside world... And no
one in the British media has asked to talk to them. No one.
The British story about the Skripals is falling apart. First we were told an off duty
police officer found them. Then we are told that an off duty nurse helped the police officer.
Then it was the off duty nurse that found them and was helped by the police officer. Then it
was the daughter of the off duty nurse that found them. Then the off duty nurse turned out to
be Britain's highest ranking female military medic. Then we are told the police officer never
attended them and had been sent to their house the following day. This week the local TV news
channel (BBC Points West) interviewed a woman that said SHE was the first one to find the
Skripals who were alone on the bench frothing at the mouth. She claims she walked over and
was going to phone an ambulance when a female police officer arrived. Then the female police
officer was interviewed and stated she was driving her police van and was the first on scene
after someone had phoned them for help. She also stated that although she didn't know what
was wrong with the Skripals, she thought the vomit on the ground was suspicious and requested
a Hazmat team in full protective gear to remove the vomit.
Vladimir,can you find out if England has just set up Ireland by sending someone there and
having them post flammable packages back to England? The addresses were so vague that they
should have alerted someone in the postal service,especially since England is on high alert
for terror attacks.That says to me that the government knew they were coming.ISIS would claim
responsibility for a silent fart in a packed room.No-one in Ireland has claimed
responsibility for the packages,probably because it's "highly likely" that England has set up
Ireland.If the Brits are found to be behind it,like black people and Israeli's have been
caught out spraying racist graffiti against themselves,Salisbury will be even more
questionable.Elliot Abrams shipped arms in "aid" convoys,so now no-one believes the aid to
Venezuela isn't hiding weapons.What have the filthy Brits been caught doing in recent years
that would make them look guilty like Elliot Abrams?
Maria Zacharova may be simply too decent a human being to realise that the west is run by
a mafia-like cabal that cares not a jot for their own peoples, let alone those in foreign
realms. She looks for logical explanations that might account for actions, but needs to face
the reality that monumental greed and corruption have hollowed out all corridors of power in
western governments. Any semblance of an unbiased independent media went extinct a long time
ago, replaced by well placed operatives from the intelligence agencies, who manage a vast
array of pseudo "journalists". The western puppet regimes are simply useful idiots who obey
instructions, they sell themselves for money and privilege. In other words, traitors to the
people who put them in office. Those public officials and politicians who perhaps had a shred
of integrity get eliminated, or compromised by indiscretions that are held over them, or by
simple intimidation tactics -- the classic "carrot and stick" method. Russians lifted
themselves from the disastrous days of "perestroika" and have restored their nation to near
normalcy. The west may at some point do the same, but it will take a complete collapse of
their present totalitarian regimes to start the healing, if it is to happen. With each
passing day, the zombification of the masses continues, let us hope it has not already got to
the stage where a return to a better world becomes unattainable.
Mrs Spokeswoman really nailed it: US & UK resort to this Dead Cat tactics everyday
now. That was the Case with Kosovo, Iraq, Libya, Ukraine, Syria & now Venezuela. However,
they only manage to bait in their "Allies" (better said Vassals)- and then they fail to
deliver since Syria. Russian Intervention & People waking up to their Lies makes their
Case less and less credible. The paralel Universe they are creating inside their brainwashing
Media is fading away. And that makes them the more dangerous...
It's sad when the only real news people in the US can get is from the Russian media. The
west is financially and morally bankrupt. Thank you Zacharova and Russia for telling the
truth about the evil deeds of the west. Median approval of U.S. leadership across 134
countries and areas stands at a new low of 30%, according to a new Gallup report. Maybe the
tide is finally turning and the evil deeds of the west will be exposed.
I think the underlying cause of all the UK anti-Russia carry ons goes right back to the
damage you did to them during the Crimean War...you bloodied their nose and they have never
forgiven you...silly buggers!
The Roman-Israeli Brits are born liars, but liars will always fall apart because their
stories never add up. I suspect that the Skripals were never even poisoned but paid by the
British to confirm the lie. The Western politicians have become so corrupt that you cannot
believe a word coming from their lying mouths. Over the decades they have become so confident
that everybody would swallow their reckless lies that they don't even care what they say and
what they do without thinking or caring about the consequences of their actions.
I think they have completely lost the plot, relying on stupidity and arrogance to achieve
the least amount possible in the messiest most insane way possible. Seriously, the publicly
state the reality, conduct regime change operations, to get US troops into and country and
then charge 150% of cost of that occupation, protection, straight out of a Mafioso playback,
only their blind arrogance and ignorance, make that kind of public stance possible. Any
government that signs onto it, traitors to their own people, selling out to an foreign
occupation, using Americans forces to sustain autocratic control of that country, those
citizens paying for the bullets Americans will use to kill them, should they try to end the
occupation. The more forces required to quell the public, the more they bill the occupied
country and the MORE PROFITABLE IT BECOMES, utter insanity. Only utterly blind stupidity
could make that public statement possible, beyond something you would expect from a backward
third world country and some despot drunk on power, nope, this from the USA, the not home of
freedom, the not home of justice and clearly the not home of democracy, the best people
killers on the planet, ready to back militarily any despot it puts in charge, at the expense
of their victims. Any sane country would hide this embarrassment, nope the US proud.
Imagine a parallel universe where Maria is the British Prime Minister. The British
politicians are not in her league. She is notionally just a spokeswoman, in Britain we don't
have such free speaking spokesmen. It seems everything said in Britain has to be a lie. So
refreshing and much more intellectually engaging to have the truth. There is the small matter
of appearance, nobody in British politics now or ever is dressed as well as Maria. Or this
show's host. I also like it how Maria has her notes on her phone.
for the past three years, elite Democratic Party partisans, along with their media partners,
force-fed thousands of "Bombshell" headlines to millions of Americans, without ever providing a
lick of evidence. The absence of evidence supporting their outrageous lies coupled with the
results of Mueller's investigation and Barr's conclusions establishes collusion – not
between Russia and the Trump family to influence the 2016 presidential election, but amongst
the Democrats and mass media to delegitimize the
The Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said, "We saw cold, hard evidence of the Trump
campaign, and indeed the Trump family, eagerly intending to collude with Russia." Pelosi has
never presented any evidence to support this claim or any of the many other suspect claims the
speaker has made.
The Chairman of House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff said, "I have evidence of collusion
with Russia and kompromat. It's all in plain sight." Schiff regularly repeated this claim to
the public yet never provided any evidence. He appeared on CNN, MSNBC, NBC, and ABC over 150
times and was never called out for repeating these lies over and over again.
Congressman Eric Swalwell on MSNBC said, "Donald Trump is a Russian agent; we have evidence
Trump and his family colluded with Russia." Swalwell has parroted this and many other claims
since 2016. Evidence provided: none.
Congresswoman Maxine Waters stated, "Trump and his buddies are scumbags who are all Putin's
puppets; we will Impeach 45." Waters has been shrieking "Impeach 45" since election day in
2016. Water's reason: she hates Trump and the entire Grand Old Party "GOP."
Many other Democratic members of Washington DC's swamp echoed similar propaganda that
mobilized the Trump "resistance." Their hit list of frequent salacious claims included "Trump
in handcuffs;" "The entire Trump family, frog-marched, and jailed forever;" "Treason, much
worse than Watergate, we have evidence;" "Trump has been a Russian asset since 1987;" "Trump is
a racist, sexist, misogynist, Islamophobic, homophobic, transphobic, anti-Semitic, xenophobic,
and let's not forget "He's the next Hitler." This "hit list" has become the Democratic party
mantra since Donald trump announced his candidacy in 2015.
Ex-Central Intelligence Agency "CIA" director John Brennan, who just so happens to be on
MSNBC's payroll, also weighed in on Trump. "Trump's behavior is treasonous. He committed high
crimes and misdemeanors. There is evidence that proves many people in Trump's orbit are guilty
of serious crimes and indictments are coming, and soon. Trump committed Treason" The penalty
for committing "treason" in America, death. Brennan never provided any evidence. Brennan's lies
have destroyed the CIA's reputation and credibility.
Viewers of CNN, MSNBC, NBC, and ABC were inundated with purposeful misrepresentations that
continuously promised faithful audiences that Mueller and his team had "mountains" of evidence
of Trump's collusion with Russia and obstruction of justice. Day after day, these media outlets
repeated how Mueller would deliver an indictment of President Trump, who had committed "treason
and high crimes and misdemeanors" that would lead to his impeachment and jail time. The corrupt
media represented that Trump's family members, who were also guilty of similar crimes, would be
sent to prison. All the above were outrageous lies.
In fact, the only convictions that arose through the Mueller investigation were low-level
process crimes which had NOTHING to do with Trump. $25 million wasted, bravo! These salacious
accusations proved to be part of an elaborate scheme to delegitimize the sitting president and
his administration in order to remove him from office. However, the Democrats and mass media
could not have done it without FBI Director James Comey's exploitation of the United States
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
We know the whole coup d'état was facilitated by FBI Director James Comey's October 20,
2016 submission of a 66-page application to the FISA court.
Comey and Sally Quillian Yates, the Deputy Attorney General of the United States, signed
this application. Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, the presiding judge of the secret FISA court,
granted an order that led to our intelligence agencies spying on the presidential campaign of
Donald J. Trump. The FBI ran a counter-intelligence investigation named "Crossfire Hurricane"
on Trump's campaign.
Comey's FISA application was largely based on information contained in the Steele dossier, a
dossier written by a disgraced MI6 agent named Christopher Steele. The dossier made wild,
unsubstantiated claims and was financed by the campaign of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic
National Committee via Clinton's law firm Perkins Coie through a company named Fusion GPS.
In a meeting with President Trump in early January 2017, James Comey told President Trump
about the existence of the Steele dossier and told him not to worry about it. Comey stated that
the dossier's contents were salacious, unverified, and untrue. Apparently, James Comey knew,
yet never disclosed to Judge Collyer, that the Steele dossier was garbage prepared by political
partisans that did not want Trump to be
elected and financed by Hillary Clinton's campaign. Three days after Comey's meeting with Trump
the entire Steele dossier was "leaked" to numerous media sources and published in it's entirety
on Buzzfeed with no mention that none of the claims in the Steele dossier had been
Comey signed and submitted two more FISA applications, one in Jan 2017, and another in April
2017 which relied upon the Steele dossier. FISA Judge Michael W. Mosman signed the January
renewal, and Judge Anne C. Conway signed the April renewal.
Apparently, Comey never disclosed, to any of the FISA judges, that the Steele dossier was:
paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign, and the DNC, or that the Department of Justice's
Bruce Ohr had warned on the credibility of the unverified Steele Dossier, or that Bruce Ohr's
wife worked for Fusion GPS and helped back door the Steele dossier into the FBI, or that the
dossier was filled with baseless allegations, lies, and
propaganda. It appears that four secret court, FISA, judges were lied to in order to kick- off
the biggest scandal in history.
FBI's Deputy Director Andrew McCabe recently stated during Congressional testimony that
"without the Steele dossier, the FISA warrants would have never been granted." Recent reports
suggest that it was ex-CIA director John Brennan who insisted that the Steele dossier be
included in the intelligence report used to request the FISA warrants. Senator Rand Paul has
issued a call that Brennan be called to testify under oath in Congress.
The entire Mueller investigation would have never been possible without this fake dossier
being used to illegally obtain FISA warrants by the omission of material facts within the
original FISA application and the three subsequent renewal applications.
Why is Judge Collyer not looking into these and other material misrepresentations used in
the FISA application to obtain search warrants to spy on Americans and on a presidential
campaign by its opposition and enabled by a weaponized Obama Department of Justice? The silence
of secret FISA court Judges Mosman, Conway, and Dearie is frightening. America's secret courts
should be abolished.
Best bet is for Russia to want to trade with the US and Europe. The gas pipeline will not be enough leverage on Germany as
it provides 9% of their needs.
Yes. And that's against the USA interests (or more correctly the US-led neoliberal empire interests). North Stream is a problem
as the goal is to economically weaken Russia, tie the EU to the USA via energy supplies and support our new client state -- Ukraine.
As you know, nothing was proven yet in Russiagate (and DNC hacks looks more and more like a false flag operation, especially
this Guccifer 2.0 personality ), but sanctions were already imposed. And when the US government speaks "Russia" in most cases
they mean "China+Russia" ;-). Russia is just a weaker link in this alliance and, as such, it is attacked first. Russiagate is
just yet another pretext after MH17, Magnitsky and such.
To me the current Anti-Russian hysteria is mainly a smokescreen to hide attempt to cement cracks in the façade of the USA neoliberal
society that Trump election revealed (including apparent legitimization of ruling neoliberal elite represented by Hillary).
And a desperate attempt to unite the society using (false) war propaganda which requires demonization of the "enemy of the
people" and neo-McCarthyism.
But this is also related to attempts to prevent/weaken the alliance of Russia and China. As geopolitical consequences of this
alliance for the USA-led neoliberal empire are very bad (for example, military alliance means the end of the USA global military
domination; energy alliance means that is now impossible to impose a blockade on China energy supplies from Middle East even if
Iran is occupied)
In this sense the recent descent into a prolonged fit of vintage Cold War jingoistic paranoia is quite understandable. While,
at the same time, totally abhorrent. My feeling is that unless Russia folds, which is unlikely, the side effects/externalities of this posture can be very bad for
the USA. In any case, the alliance of Russia and China which Obama administration policies forged spells troubles to the global neoliberal
empire dominated by the USA.
Trump rejection of existing forms of neoliberal globalization is one sign that this process already started and some politicians
already are trying to catch the wind and adapt to a "new brave world" by using preemptive adjustments.
Which is why all this Trump-Putin summit hysteria is about.
Neither hard, nor soft neoliberals want any adjustments. They are ready to fight for the US-led neoliberal empire till the
last American (excluding, of course, themselves and their families)
"... What most people don't realize about Brzezinski, is that he dramatically changed his views on global hegemony a few years after he published his 1997 masterpiece The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperative. In his 2012 book, Strategic Vision, Brzezinski recommended a more thoughtful and cooperative approach that would ease America's unavoidable transition (decline?) without creating a power vacuum that could lead to global chaos. ..."
"... Haass's critique illustrates the level of denial among elites who are now gripped by fear of an uncertain future. ..."
"... Confrontation will only accelerate the pace of US decline and the final collapse of the liberal world order. ..."
"... "The liberal world order, which lasted from the end of World War 2 until today" Thanks for the laugh. It was over with the passing of the 1947 National Security Act. ..."
"... It is not a coincidence that this anti-Russian climate of hatred started back when Putin showed up the left's president, Barack Obama, over Libya. ..."
"... political globalists who wanted a liberal world order but didn't think about the economic side of things much and so let their economic policy be decided by the central banking mafia ..."
"... You should think more about US being aced. Syria was a masterstroke, but so was Ukraine, and not for Russia. Russia lost an extremely valuable ally and a trully brother nation, maybe forever. Ukraine, in the grand scheme of things, is a huge defeat for Russia. ..."
"... You definitely missed last 25 years of Russian-Ukrainian relations. You also, evidently, have very vague understanding of the Ukrainian inner dynamics. I am not sure we can speak of "brother nation" because Ukraine as political nation (and she did form as such by early 2000s) can not be "brother nation" to Russia by definition. In fact, being anti-Russia is the only natural state of Ukrainian political nation ..."
"... As it turned out, Russia is doing just fine without Ukraine. In a long run, if what is called Ukraine today decides to commit suicide by the cop, she sure can try to place US military bases East of Dniepr and we will observe a rather peculiar case of fireworks. ..."
"... It would have been a total catastrophe for Russia had she lost Sebastopol; but so long as Crimea is safely in Moscow's hands, Ukraine is not make-or-break. Russia's global position now, in fact, is even stronger than it was in 2014. ..."
"... Western corporations have been competing with each other (for decades now) to offshore everything to reduce costs /increase profits. The idea is to sell at Western prices and produce at Eastern prices, and this arbitrage has reached crazy proportions. ..."
"... Jews also hate nationalism since it threatens their (minority) power and highlights dual loyalty (or no loyalty) so the Zio-Glob are on one side, and the public on the other, with little common ground between them. ..."
"... At least Brzezinski became well aware of this shift. So many of America's neo-conservatives have largely failed in expressing this defeat. Between Brzezinski and Boot, & the Others, they've all turned out to be fanatic ideologues. ..."
The liberal world order, which lasted from the end of World War 2 until today, is rapidly collapsing. The center of gravity is
shifting from west to east where China and India are experiencing explosive growth and where a revitalized Russia has restored its
former stature as a credible global superpower. These developments, coupled with America's imperial overreach and chronic economic
stagnation, have severely hampered US ability to shape events or to successfully pursue its own strategic objectives. As Washington's
grip on global affairs continues to loosen and more countries reject the western development model, the current order will progressively
weaken clearing the way for a multipolar world badly in need of a new security architecture. Western elites, who are unable to accept
this new dynamic, continue to issue frenzied statements expressing their fear of a future in which the United States no longer dictates
At the 2019 Munich Security Conference, Chairman Wolfgang Ischinger, underscored many of these same themes. Here's an excerpt
from his presentation:
"The whole liberal world order appears to be falling apart – nothing is as it once was Not only do war and violence play a
more prominent role again: a new great power confrontation looms at the horizon. In contrast to the early 1990s, liberal democracy
and the principle of open markets are no longer uncontested .
In this international environment, the risk of an inter-state war between great and middle powers has clearly increased .What
we had been observing in many places around the world was a dramatic increase in brinkmanship, that is, highly risky actions on
the abyss – the abyss of war .
No matter where you look, there are countless conflicts and crises the core pieces of the international order are breaking
apart, without it being clear whether anyone can pick them up – or even wants to. ("Who will pick up the pieces?",
Munich Security Conference )
Ischinger is not alone in his desperation nor are his feelings limited to elites and intellectuals. By now, most people are familiar
with the demonstrations that have rocked Paris, the political cage-match that is tearing apart England (Brexit), the rise of anti-immigrant
right-wing groups that have sprung up across Europe, and the surprising rejection of the front-runner candidate in the 2016 presidential
elections in the US. Everywhere the establishment and their neoliberal policies are being rejected by the masses of working people
who have only recently begun to wreak havoc on a system that has ignored them for more than 30 years. Trump's public approval ratings
have improved, not because he has "drained the swamp" as he promised, but because he is still seen as a Washington outsider despised
by the political class, the foreign policy establishment and the media. His credibility rests on the fact that he is hated by the
coalition of elites who working people now regard as their sworn enemy.
The president of the prestigious Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, summed up his views on the "weakening of the liberal
world order" in an article that appeared on the CFR's website. Here's what he said:
"Attempts to build global frameworks are failing. Protectionism is on the rise; the latest round of global trade talks never
came to fruition. .At the same time, great power rivalry is returning
There are several reasons why all this is happening, and why now. The rise of populism is in part a response to stagnating
incomes and job loss, owing mostly to new technologies but widely attributed to imports and immigrants. Nationalism is a tool
increasingly used by leaders to bolster their authority, especially amid difficult economic and political conditions .
But the weakening of the liberal world order is due, more than anything else, to the changed attitude of the U.S. Under President
Donald Trump, the US decided against joining the Trans-Pacific Partnership and to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement. It
has threatened to leave the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Iran nuclear deal. It has unilaterally introduced steel
and aluminum tariffs, relying on a justification (national security) that others could use, in the process placing the world at
risk of a trade war .America First" and the liberal world order seem incompatible." ("Liberal World Order, R.I.P.", Richard Haass,
What Haass is saying is that the cure for globalisation is more globalization, that the greatest threat to the liberal world order
is preventing the behemoth corporations from getting more of what they want; more self-aggrandizing trade agreements, more offshoring
of businesses, more outsourcing of jobs, more labor arbitrage, and more privatization of public assets and critical resources. Trade
liberalization is not liberalization, it does not strengthen democracy or create an environment where human rights, civil liberties
and the rule of law are respected. It's a policy that focuses almost-exclusively on the free movement of capital in order to enrich
wealthy shareholders and fatten the bottom line. The sporadic uprisings around the world– Brexit, yellow vests, emergent right wing
groups– can all trace their roots back to these one-sided, corporate-friendly trade deals that have precipitated the steady slide
in living standards, the shrinking of incomes, and the curtailing of crucial benefits for the great mass of working people across
the US and Europe. President Trump is not responsible for the outbreak of populism and social unrest, he is merely an expression
of the peoples rage. Trump's presidential triumph was a clear rejection of the thoroughly-rigged elitist system that continues to
transfer the bulk of the nation's wealth to tiniest layer of people at the top.
Haass's critique illustrates the level of denial among elites who are now gripped by fear of an uncertain future.
As we noted earlier, the center of gravity has shifted from west to east, which is the one incontrovertible fact that cannot be
denied. Washington's brief unipolar moment –following the breakup of the Soviet Union in December, 1991 -- has already passed and
new centers of industrial and financial power are gaining pace and gradually overtaking the US in areas that are vital to America's
primacy. This rapidly changing economic environment is accompanied by widespread social discontent, seething class-based resentment,
and ever-more radical forms of political expression. The liberal order is collapsing, not because the values espoused in the 60s
and 70s have lost their appeal, but because inequality is widening, the political system has become unresponsive to the demands of
the people, and because US can no longer arbitrarily impose its will on the world.
Globalization has fueled the rise of populism, it has helped to exacerbate ethnic and racial tensions, and it is largely responsible
for the hollowing out of America's industrial core. Haass's antidote would only throw more gas on the fire and hasten the day when
liberals and conservatives form into rival camps and join in a bloody battle to the end. Someone has to stop the madness before the
country descends into a second Civil War.
What Haass fails to discuss, is Washington's perverse reliance on force to preserve the liberal world order, after all, it's not
like the US assumed its current dominant role by merely competing more effectively in global markets. Oh, no. Behind the silk glove
lies the iron fist, which has been used in over 50 regime change operations since the end of WW2. The US has over 800 military bases
scattered across the planet and has laid to waste one country after the other in successive interventions, invasions and occupations
for as long as anyone can remember. This penchant for violence has been sharply criticized by other members of the United Nations,
but only Russia has had the courage to openly oppose Washington where it really counts, on the battlefield.
Russia is presently engaged in military operations that have either prevented Washington from achieving its strategic objectives
(like Ukraine) or rolled back Washington's proxy-war in Syria. Naturally, liberal elites like Haass feel threatened by these developments
since they are accustomed to a situation in which 'the world is their oyster'. But, alas, oysters have been removed from the menu,
and the United States is going to have to make the adjustment or risk a third world war.
What Russian President Vladimir Putin objects to, is Washington's unilateralism, the cavalier breaking of international law to
pursue its own imperial ambitions. Ironically, Putin has become the greatest defender of the international system and, in particular,
the United Nations which is a point he drove home in his presentation at the 70th session of the UN General Assembly in New York
on September 28, 2015, just two days before Russian warplanes began their bombing missions in Syria. Here's part of what he said:
"The United Nations is unique in terms of legitimacy, representation and universality .We consider any attempt to undermine
the legitimacy of the United Nations as extremely dangerous. It may result in the collapse of the entire architecture of international
relations, leaving no rules except the rule of force. The world will be dominated by selfishness rather than collective effort,
by dictate rather than equality and liberty, and instead of truly sovereign nations we will have colonies controlled from outside."(Russian
President Vladimir Putin at the 70th session of the
UN General Assembly )
Putin's speech, followed by the launching of the Russian operation in Syria, was a clear warning to the foreign policy establishment
that they would no longer be allowed to topple governments and destroy countries with impunity. Just as Putin was willing to put
Russian military personnel at risk in Syria, so too, he will probably put them at risk in Venezuela, Lebanon, Ukraine and other locations
where they might be needed. And while Russia does not have anywhere near the raw power of the US military, Putin seems to be saying
that he will put his troops in the line of fire to defend international law and the sovereignty of nations. Here's Putin again:
"We all know that after the end of the Cold War the world was left with one center of dominance, and those who found themselves
at the top of the pyramid were tempted to think that, since they are so powerful and exceptional, they know best what needs to
be done and thus they don't need to reckon with the UN, which, instead of rubber-stamping the decisions they need, often stands
in their way .
We should all remember the lessons of the past. For example, we remember examples from our Soviet past, when the Soviet Union
exported social experiments, pushing for changes in other countries for ideological reasons, and this often led to tragic consequences
and caused degradation instead of progress.
It seems, however, that instead of learning from other people's mistakes, some prefer to repeat them and continue to export
revolutions, only now these are "democratic" revolutions. Just look at the situation in the Middle East and Northern Africa already
mentioned by the previous speaker. Instead of bringing about reforms, aggressive intervention indiscriminately destroyed government
institutions and the local way of life. Instead of democracy and progress, there is now violence, poverty, social disasters and
total disregard for human rights, including even the right to life.
I'm urged to ask those who created this situation: do you at least realize now what you've done?" (Russian President Vladimir
Putin at the 70th session of the UN General Assembly)
Here Putin openly challenges the concept of a 'liberal world order' which in fact is a sobriquet used to conceal Washington's
relentless plundering of the planet. There's nothing liberal about toppling regimes and plunging millions of people into anarchy,
poverty and desperation. Putin is simply trying to communicate to US leaders that the world is changing, that nations in Asia are
gaining strength and momentum, and that Washington will have to abandon the idea that any constraint on its behavior is a threat
to its national security interests.
Former national security advisor to Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brzezinski, appears to agree on this point and suggests that the US
begin to rethink its approach to foreign policy now that the world has fundamentally changed and other countries are demanding a
bigger place at the table.
What most people don't realize about Brzezinski, is that he dramatically changed his views on global hegemony a few years after
he published his 1997 masterpiece The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperative. In his 2012 book, Strategic
Vision, Brzezinski recommended a more thoughtful and cooperative approach that would ease America's unavoidable transition (decline?)
without creating a power vacuum that could lead to global chaos. Here's a short excerpt from an article
he wrote in 2016 for the American Interest titled "Toward a Global Realignment":
"The fact is that there has never been a truly "dominant" global power until the emergence of America on the world scene .That
era is now ending .As its era of global dominance ends, the United States needs to take the lead in realigning the global power
architecture .The United States is still the world's politically, economically, and militarily most powerful entity but, given
complex geopolitical shifts in regional balances, it is no longer the globally imperial power.
America can only be effective in dealing with the current Middle Eastern violence if it forges a coalition that involves, in
varying degrees, also Russia and China .
A constructive U.S. policy must be patiently guided by a long-range vision. It must seek outcomes that promote the gradual
realization in Russia that its only place as an influential world power is ultimately within Europe. China's increasing role in
the Middle East should reflect the reciprocal American and Chinese realization that a growing U.S.-PRC partnership in coping with
the Middle Eastern crisis is an historically significant test of their ability to shape and enhance together wider global stability.
The alternative to a constructive vision, and especially the quest for a one-sided militarily and ideologically imposed outcome,
can only result in prolonged and self-destructive futility.
Since the next twenty years may well be the last phase of the more traditional and familiar political alignments with which
we have grown comfortable, the response needs to be shaped now . And that accommodation has to be based on a strategic vision
that recognizes the urgent need for a new geopolitical framework." ("Toward a Global Realignment", Zbigniew Brzezinski,
The American Interest
This strikes me as a particularly well-reasoned and insightful article. It shows that Brzezinski understood that the world had
changed, that power had shifted eastward, and that the only path forward for America was cooperation, accommodation, integration
and partnership. Tragically, there is no base of support for these ideas on Capital Hill, the White House or among the U.S. foreign
policy establishment. The entire political class and their allies in the media unanimously support a policy of belligerence, confrontation
and war. The United States will not prevail in a confrontation with Russia and China any more than it will be able to turn back the
clock to the post war era when America, the Superpower, reigned supreme. Confrontation will only accelerate the pace of US decline
and the final collapse of the liberal world order.
Zbig has fially admitted that America needs to become friends with Russia. We can not handle the world alone,but with Russia we
would have 90% of the worlds nuclear weapons and vast geopolitical ifluence. Americans do hot have anything against Russia. It
is the neocon cabal that is fostering conflict . Thet just can not get over the fact that they tried and failed to take control
of Russia. They are trying to do so to the u.S.A.
"2. Russia should become the real leader of the new process. (It has already become it but not yet aware of the fact.) The
West and Israel need a strategic alliance with the Muslim world more than anything else, and this alliance is possible only through
Russia. Only Russia in an alliance with the Muslim world can keep China in check without conflicts, helping it find its new place
in the world as another super-power.
3. Leaders of Russia, America, Israel, Europe, Iran, India, and international financial capitals must initiate a dialogue over
leaving this crisis behind and preventing events like those which swept America on September 11.
A time of change is upon us, and it's futile to wish we were living in some other era. We have to change ourselves and change
the world "
No. 75 October 2001
THE THIRD FORCE OF WORLD WAR III
"THE AMERICANS DON'T REALIZE IT YET, BUT CHINA HAS WRITTEN ITS OWN SCRIPT FOR SQUEEZING THE UNITED STATES OFF THE WORLD STAGE.
CHINA SUPPORTS ACTIONS OF THE WEST AIMED AT MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION OF RUSSIA AND THE MUSLIM WORLD. THE WEST, RUSSIA, ISRAEL,
AND THE MUSLIM WORLD MUST WORK TOGETHER.
THE WESTERN SCRIPT
"Using techniques of manipulating public opinion, the West is trying to establish the illusion of a global forces with the
fascist- like ideology of Wahhabi fundamentalism. As far as the West is concerned, Wahhabi and Islam are the same thing. It is
because of this that the essential terrorism of Wahhabi ideas is being formulated so simply for public consumption: all Muslims
are terrorists by nature.
The preliminary objective of brainwashing (Islam is the basis of terrorism) is thus achieved. "
"This script becomes possible when we assume that some Western elites and secret services made a kind of covert pact with this
THE CHINESE SCRIPT
" Throw a great deal of dollars into the market all at once, and the dollar will crash. A conflict with Taiwan may follow.
It will be a conflict waged with American money, with American weapons, investment, and high technology. Add the nuclear factor
here. Suffice it to recall the recent scandal when Chinese intelligence obtained all major nuclear secrets of the United States.
What most people don't realize about Brzezinski, is that he dramatically changed his views on global hegemony a few years
after he published his 1997 masterpiece The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperative. In his 2012 book,
Strategic Vision, Brzezinski recommended a more thoughtful and cooperative approach that would ease America's unavoidable transition
(decline?) without creating a power vacuum that could lead to global chaos.
So somebody put forth a deluded crack-pot idea that got great traction and made a lot of people very rich and powerful who
want to stay that way, but the originator now says he was wrong and we should change. Yeah, those rich and powerful people just
have to agree to give up some of that. How likely is that without a major catastrophe forcing them, given what we know about human
Maybe the lesson is to have realistic ideas about foreign policy and relations in the future. Did anybody seriously believe
countries with long histories like Russia and China were always going to be happy playing second fiddle to the US?
Haass's critique illustrates the level of denial among elites who are now gripped by fear of an uncertain future.
True, but their problem is compounded with their fear which is anchored in the past, whose real history blows all current,
being discredited as I type this, narratives out of the water. This, plus most of them, Haas and CFR included, do not operate
with actual facts and data.
"The West and Israel need a strategic alliance with the Muslim world"
Unfortunately, this is probably not entirely feasible considering the United States's inappropriately close relationship to
Israel and the American government's radical stance of forcing LGBTQ issues; as San Jose proves, these people aren't simply going
to leave you alone, but rather they will make you conform under threat. Probably what will happen in the future is a Japan-EU-Russia
alliance that makes peace with the Middle East and contains the Chinese military as much as possible.
The US could very well find itself cut out at some point. It has already proved itself both reckless and incompetent
with its handling of Iran, Israel, and Venezuela. Also, I suspect that neither ordinary EU citizens nor Asians will want to be
ruled over by a group of POC racists who discriminate against Europeans, Asian males, and traditional families.
I think the rest of the world should begin considering alternate defense arrangements. The US cannot afford to defend their
interests forever with an aging, shrinking white Caucasian population and a growing, less capable and less conscientious replacement
population less willing to die in imperial wars. Increasingly, the US will be less capable of defending others in the Pacific
from China as it Affirmative Actions its air force; Obama was trying to do that throughout the whole of the American military
and accomplished his objective by lowering standards. I think this process should continue in the future with disastrous results.
In the future, Asia will try to make peace with China before they get too strong and China will reciprocate with generous territorial
concessions in exchange for neutrality. For example, the Chinese may relinquish territorial claims in the Philippines in exchange
for a treaty stating that the Philippines will not base the American military or buy weapons from them, but they would be allowed
to buy weapons from third parties such as the Russians. A series of moves like this might dramatically weaken the American position
in the region, allowing China to jumpskip to Africa and the Middle East more effectively. Perhaps a similar deal will be worked
out with Taiwan: autonomy and a peace treaty in exchange for no weapon purchases or defense arrangements with the US, but Taiwan
could still buy Russian weapons.
"Zbig has fially admitted that America needs to become friends with Russia."
As Karlin has noted, I don't see this happening in the near future, not with the insane levels of anti-Russian hate coming
from the American left, some of which is just pure racial hatred of whites projected onto Russians.
All this is irrelevant in the long run. America will be a third-world country in 50 years or less. Imagine a government filled
with AOCs, Omars, and Bookers, with a constituency that matches. Brazil of the North isn't going to be a superpower. We can look
on that as a silver lining.
The United States will not prevail in a confrontation with Russia and China any more than it will be able to turn back the
clock to the post war era when America, the Superpower, reigned supreme. Confrontation will only accelerate the pace of
US decline and the final collapse of the liberal world order.
Very dangerous times are ahead. A declining superpower in late empire mode may make risky decisions. I wonder if America will
have a Suez event in the upcoming decade? The 1956 Suez crisis heralded the rise of a new superpower and the eclipse of another
The attitudes and political beliefs of your average Russian are very similar to many Red State conservatives, as has been noted
on this webzine at least once in recent memory (and with an accompanying political map with similarities noted between American
Blue and Red States compared with Russia). The American left projects its racist hate onto the Russians in response to those similarities.
It is not a coincidence that this anti-Russian climate of hatred started back when Putin showed up the left's president,
Barack Obama, over Libya.
That also explains the left's hypocrisy on war: their tribe's racial leader, Obama, wanted war in Libya, so war is now good;
Russia opposed it and later prevented war in Syria (which Obama wanted), so the Russians are now the bad guys. It's purely a matter
of tribal affiliation and racial hate on the part of the American left.
I wonder if America will have a Suez event in the upcoming decade?
She already had it and one is unfolding right this moment. For an empire of this size and influence, granted declining dramatically,
it takes a sequence of events. "Suez Moment" for Britain happened during WW II, the actual Suez crisis was merely a nominal conclusion
to British Empire dying in WW II.
We'll see in the coming years if we get a crisis that lays it all bare.
Ongoing real Revolution in Military Affairs and US losing conventional (and nuclear) arms race is what unfolds right now. Realistically,
Putin's March 1, 2018 Speech to Federal Assembly was also one of these moments -- as I said, the process is protracted and at
each of its phases US geopolitical cards have been aced and trumped, NO pun intended.
The West and Israel need a strategic alliance with the Muslim world more than anything else, and this alliance is possible
only through Russia.
i think this is short-sighted. The global north needs to combine to contain the global south or the central banking mafia will
eventually use them to destroy the north's genetic advantages and all our descendants will end up as 85 IQ slave-cattle.
The liberal world order, which lasted from the end of World War 2 until today, is rapidly collapsing.
Really? Where? US is still in Middle East and now threatens war with Iran. Venezuela is on the brink. Japan and EU are the
ever loyal dogs of the US. If they've been upset with Trump, it's not because he wants to exert more influence but less.
the actual Suez crisis was merely a nominal conclusion to British Empire dying in WW II
The Atlantic charter signed aboard the HMS Prince of Wales, in Placentia Bay, Newfoundland on August 14, 1941 by FDR and Churchill
was probably the moment when the old British empire traded places with the new global power, the United States. So you are correct
in your analysis.
@MarkinLA This is not
really about history, it is about power. Many of the US allies have much longer histories, but that does not help them in the
power department. China and Russia have enough power to stand only on their own two feet.
@Andrei MartyanovYou should think more about US being aced. Syria was a masterstroke, but so was Ukraine, and not for Russia. Russia lost an
extremely valuable ally and a trully brother nation, maybe forever. Ukraine, in the grand scheme of things, is a huge defeat for
The West and Israel need a strategic alliance with the Muslim world more than anything else, and this alliance is possible
only through Russia.
Sberbank calls on UAE businesses to invest in Russia, offers help
"According to the statement, the Gulf countries' total capital available for investment is estimated at more than $3.2 trillion
but only "a small part" of capital earmarked for investing in Russia has actually gone into Russia-based projects."
"The Russian visitors set out Sberbank's technology strategy and described achievements by the Moscow-based lender in artificial
They also "pointed out interest in Islamic finance", the statement said."
Ukraine, in the grand scheme of things, is a huge defeat for Russia.
You definitely missed last 25 years of Russian-Ukrainian relations. You also, evidently, have very vague understanding
of the Ukrainian inner dynamics. I am not sure we can speak of "brother nation" because Ukraine as political nation (and she did
form as such by early 2000s) can not be "brother nation" to Russia by definition. In fact, being anti-Russia is the only natural
state of Ukrainian political nation.
There is another twist to all this–these are Russians now, who do not want to deal with Ukraine in any of her manifestations
and, to rub the salt into the wound, Zbig was delusional when thought that denying Ukraine to Russia would spell the end of Russian
"imperialism". As it turned out, Russia is doing just fine without Ukraine. In a long run, if what is called Ukraine today
decides to commit suicide by the cop, she sure can try to place US military bases East of Dniepr and we will observe a rather
peculiar case of fireworks.
The Atlantic charter signed aboard the HMS Prince of Wales,in Placentia Bay,Newfoundland on August 14, 1941 by FDR and Churchill
was probably the moment when the old British empire traded places with the new global power, the United States.
This happened in 1941 at secret ABC (America-Britain-Canada) consultations where Lord Halifax was trying to recruit American
resources for defense of Britain's imperial interests. US "politely" declined. Big Three became Big Two and a Half at 1943 Tehran
Conference at which Stalin was very specific that USSR wanted American as a head of Overlord.
All this pursuant to a strategic scandal between US and British Empire at Casablanca where General Stanley Embick of Marshall's
OPD accused Britain in his memorandum of avoiding fighting main Nazi forces due to Britain's imperial interests. Churchill knew
the significance of Tehran and suffered non-stop bouts of jealousy and suspicion towards FDR and Stalin.
I am sure Sir Winston knew that FDR wanted to meet Stalin without him. Stalin refused to do so without Churchill. As per "global
power"–sure, except for one teeny-weeny fact (or rather facts), since WW II "global power" didn't win a single war against even
more-or-less determined enemy.
Ukraine, in the grand scheme of things, is a huge defeat for Russia.
It would have been a total catastrophe for Russia had she lost Sebastopol; but so long as Crimea is safely in Moscow's
hands, Ukraine is not make-or-break. Russia's global position now, in fact, is even stronger than it was in 2014.
It will be much worse than Brazil, Brazil managed to cover up the reality that whites dominate politics and the economy (although
there is a new push to copy the American affirmative action ideology). In America whites will not be able to do what is happening
in Brazil, all politics will be non white dominated, likewise the woke corporate blue haired brigade will ensure that non whites
dominate all companies, no exceptions allowed. The end result of this is predictable, Americans will be wishing they were like
Globalization has fueled the rise of populism, it has helped to exacerbate ethnic and racial tensions, and it is largely
responsible for the hollowing out of America's industrial core.
Western corporations have been competing with each other (for decades now) to offshore everything to reduce costs /increase
profits. The idea is to sell at Western prices and produce at Eastern prices, and this arbitrage has reached crazy proportions.
The US has in fact exported whole industrial sectors (with the jobs and innovation). Same in Europe with a company such as
Decathlon (Europe's Nº1 sport goods supplier) entirely sourcing its products outside Europe.
Conclusion that if globalization fails, then so do these companies, and they have a massive incentive buy political protection
from Western governments – which they are doing. Nationalism and America First are anathema to them and they have (amazingly)
managed to built globalization and open frontiers into the ethos of the EU and US – with all the self-serving multicultural Save
the World blah.
Jews also hate nationalism since it threatens their (minority) power and highlights dual loyalty (or no loyalty) so the
Zio-Glob are on one side, and the public on the other, with little common ground between them.
This doesn't mean that it's impossible to stop outsourcing. If it happened, then Decathlon would either go bankrupt or have
to switch production to Rumania or Portugal = higher prices, but at least the money would stay in Europe. Same with the other
industries, and the first step has to be to cut down the power of the EU bureaucracy and Washington.
Absolutely correct. Without an honest media, it is impossible to make good decisions.
Those Zionists who control the media in the West are deluding themselves. They will be the biggest losers when ordinary people
finally wake up to the fact that they have been lied to for over 100 years – WW1, WW2, Palestine, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Ukraine,
Russia, Crimea, MH-17, Skripals, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, 9/11 and many other instances.
Not so fast. OK, so maybe Zbig had some second thoughts about the whole project in 2012. But didn't the same Zbig opine in 2015,
at the start of Russia's Syria intervention, that the US should strike hard and fast before the Russkies managed to complete their
buildup there? To me that sounded rather much like an unprovoked attack on Russian troops, who were legally in Syria at the invitation
of its internationally recognized government.
Bottom line, for all of his far-too-long career Mr. Brzezinski has been exactly what one would expect from the spiritual father
of al-Qaeda: a vile and reckless individual. Anyone looking that way for salvation needs some time out for reflection.
This strikes me as a particularly well-reasoned and insightful article. It shows that Brzezinski understood that the world
had changed, that power had shifted eastward,
This is an excellent article, which addresses the key historic driver of our time. By 2015, world GDP had already passed the
threshold where the GDP share of the West had become lesser than the share of the Rest.
The major share of global wealth shifting towards Asia is an ineluctable historic re-alignment; it is a natural return to the
long-term historic balance pre-Industrial Revolution.
Western politicians ' problem is that they don't want to "break the news" to their people that Western standards of living
are going to degrade ineluctably over the coming years , because that would expose their incompetence, as well as highlight
the need to address wealth inequality in the West .
It is easier instead to the blame the disenfranchised, pauperised citizens voting for Trump, Brexit, and other "extreme" political
At least Brzezinski became well aware of this shift. So many of America's neo-conservatives have largely failed in expressing
this defeat. Between Brzezinski and Boot, & the Others, they've all turned out to be fanatic ideologues.
@notanon Ralph Nader
used to say the big issue is money in politics -- the money that "Congress Critters" use to get their government jobs at $174k.
To get one of those government jobs, you don't have to understand something as complex as the banking system, which is made more
opaque by the globalist neoliberals who want to maintain the Cheap Labor Lobby's beloved status quo.
You don't have to be Nomi Prins, someone who actually worked on Wall Street and knows its nooks and crannies, to get a Congress
Critter job. You just have to be the right kind of pander bear with the right kind of faux outrage at selective moments.
The other problem is that -- like most of us in the general public -- Congress Critters have to rely on people in the financial
system to navigate the terrain. It's a math-heavy field. Politicians have apparently always done this. They have created more
than one era with too-big-to-fail institutions. That is what one of Prins' books describes.
But it does not matter whether it's bankers or the manufacturers, employing welfare-assisted illegal aliens or foreign nationals
on foreign soil. And it does not matter that Congress Critters occasionally put the bigwigs on the hot seat as a PR stunt. They
aren't going to do anything to actually change policy unless the corporate masters who fund their campaigns give them the go ahead.
And they don't really even understand why.
If you think Congress Critters understand the global banking system, you should watch the banking committee hearing on C-SPAN,
where they grilled the Treasury Secretary, dressing him down like he was a $10-per-hour call center worker. It makes for good
Just like at a call center, the humiliation parade had nothing to do with the details of the work or getting anything done
other than convincing voters that a bunch of fabulously wealthy legislators (every one) with a 212-day work year really care,
especially about predatory factors in the financial system that supposedly affect only oppressed skin-pigmentation factions, located
in their districts.
You vicariously enjoy rebellious facial expressions that you could never exhibit during a frequently absentee mom manager's
tirades for fear of being fired from a churn job that does not cover the cost of rent that has risen by 72% over 25 years, even
when you add any paltry commission for taking the trouble to always meeting your numbers. But that will be the extent of it. It
is for show.
My favorite part was Empire-related; it involved the Rep. from Guam, a Congress Critter from one of US's far-flung territories.
His mild and precise disposition made a strong contrast with the Chairwoman's fiery ambiguity. Since his questions were math-related
and about specific budgetary matters, the Treasury Secretary seemed more frazzled than when he was receiving the emotional Sermon
from the gavel-happy chairwoman.
Guam Rep asked the Treasury Secretary about a massive transference of funds from the budget, affecting things like the territory's
education budget, trying to clarify whether the Earned Income Tax Credit was actually a "liability."
The language of most of our legislators reflects how bought off they are by the Cheap Labor Lobby. Which is why this Rep from
Guam's straight-forward language was so refreshing.
By design, the "Child" "Tax" "Credit" and the Earned Income Tax Credit sound like things that would not subtract from the overall
budget to me, too, but this is not money going to people who paid too much income tax. This is money that is credited back to
people who make too little to pay income tax.
The moms often call it their "taxes," when explaining to you what they plan to spend it on. It is not education, Rep. from
Guam. It is stuff like trips to the beach with a boyfriend and tattoos. That's doable for many low-wage mom workers since their
major monthly bills are covered by government.
I enjoyed the Treasury Secretary's facial expressions at this point as well. It appeared to be two math types who didn't really
thrive on the process of figuring out how to spin this fiscal irresponsibility, squirming in their chairs and / or looking kind
of aghast at the absurdity of the situation.
It would have been nice if the Rep from Guam had been honest enough to narrow that down even more, explaining that the small
amount of EITC money going to non-womb-productive, non-welfare-eligible citizens who mostly don't bother to claim such a paltry
sum is the not the big issue.
It is the Refundable Child Tax Credit up to $6,431, not so much the smaller maximum EITC of up to $451. It is the big check,
given as an additional reward to single-breadwinner, womb-productive households that also often receive free EBT food, reduced-cost
rent, monthly cash assistance and free electricity when the single breadwinner works part-time, keeping her income under the earned-income
limits for the programs.
He mentioned that Guam has a lot of poor workers like that, but so does the mainland. It is one of the big reasons for the
impending collapse: undremployment of prime-aged citizens.
If it is due to technology, it is just because employers of office workers now mostly need data entry people since advanced
software does most of the mid-level analytical work. And employers love to hire a near-100% womb-productive "diversity"of childbearing-aged
moms with spousal income, rent-covering child support or welfare and refundable child tax credit cash who do not need decent pay
or full-time hours. "It would mess them up with the government," as one all-mom employer put it.
Employers benefit from a welfare-fueled workforce that does not need higher pay. The Cheap Labor Lobby benefits. Congress Critters
at $174k benefit via fat campaign war chests, but the many welfare-ineligible job seekers who need for pay alone to cover all
household bills are screwed royally in this rigged system.
It is also screwing the SS Trust Fund that is no longer running surpluses and a lot of other things.
Guam Rep asked the Treasury Secretary if he was responsible and, specifically, what could he done to help restore fiscal order.
Of course, the Treasury Secretary isn't responsible for the mid-allocation of funds. Pandering Congress Critters are. They have
the "power of the purse" per US Constitution. The Treasury Sec. just tries to balance the books.
But it was nice that at least one of them showed some non-theatrical concern for finding out which of the six-figure Critters
is responsible. He sounded like he wanted constructive action to stop the Neoliberal House of Cards from just putting more structurally
unsound cards on the deck.
The fact that one has to go to RT for such professional journalism is telling. A pundit on
Vesti is arguing that the current situation is "USSR reversed", in that the US now feels the
need to "mute" Russia but Russia does not feel the need to "mute" the US. Because Russia is
the country whose leadership is being more truthful, this results in Russia being more open
to foreign media and dissident opinion. He says "openness is beneficial for us", "openness
makes us the winning side", and "there is nothing they can tell us about us that we don't
already know". I have been thinking along the same lines. From the 3:00 mark onwards
"... Meanwhile, Sater is still working for the FBI , according to two current FBI agents. Moreover, he has relationships with at least six members of Robert Mueller's team, "some going back more than 10 years." ..."
Felix Sater, the man at the center of a controversial email "tying" President Trump to
Russia while trying to work a business deal, has come forward in a comprehensive
BuzzFeed News Exposé, which if Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Anthony Cormier and
co-author Jason Leopold hadn't verified - nobody would believe.
Sater went from a "Wall Street wunderkind" working at Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, to
getting barred from the securities industry over a barroom brawl which led to a year in prison,
to facilitating a $40 million pump-and-dump stock scheme for the New York mafia, to working
telecom deals in Russia - where the FBI and CIA tapped him as an undercover intelligence asset
who was told by his handler " I want you to understand: If you're caught, the USA is going to
disavow you and, at best, you get a bullet in the head ."
... ... ...
Meanwhile, Sater is still working for the FBI , according to two current FBI agents.
Moreover, he has relationships with at least six members of Robert Mueller's team, "some going
back more than 10 years."
To this day, Sater continues to cooperate with the FBI and Justice Department, he said in
his statement to the House Intelligence Committee. He wouldn't disclose additional details,
except to say that he works on "international matters." Two US officials confirmed Sater
continues to be a reliable asset.
As for his regular life, when he relocated back to the US in 2010, he recalled, "Donald
said, 'Where have you been?'" Sater said Trump asked him to join the Trump Organization.
"That's when I became senior advisor to him," he said. The Trump Organization and the White
House declined to comment. - BuzzFeed
In effect, Sater - at least according to BuzzFeed , is more or less a rockstar opportunist
spy with a shady past, who redeemed himself as an asset for the CIA, the Defense Intelligence
Agency (DIA) and the FBI. During the course of his work for the agencies, all unpaid, BuzzFeed
confirmed the following exploits:
He obtained five of the personal satellite telephone numbers for Osama bin Laden before
9/11 and he helped flip the personal secretary to Mullah Omar, then the head of the Taliban
and an ally of bin Laden, into a source who provided the location of al-Qaeda training camps
and weapons caches.
In 2004, he persuaded a source in Russia's foreign military intelligence to hand over the
name and photographs of a North Korean military operative who was purchasing equipment to
build the country's nuclear arsenal.
Sater provided US intelligence with details about possible assassination threats against
former president George W. Bush and secretary of state Colin Powell. Sater reported that
jihadists were hiding in a hut outside Bagram Air Base and planned to shoot down Powell's
plane during a January 2002 visit. He later told his handlers that two female al-Qaeda
members were trying to recruit an Afghan woman working in the Senate barbershop to poison
President Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney.
He went undercover in Cyprus and Istanbul to catch Russian and Ukrainian cybercriminals
around 2005. After the FBI set him up with a fake name and background, Sater posed as a money
launderer to help nab the suspects for washing funds stolen from US financial institutions
The country was divided before Mueller Report. Now it is even more divided.
"... We wouldn't know that a Clinton-linked operative, Joseph Mifsud, seeded Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos with the rumor that Russia had 'Dirt' on Hillary Clinton - which would later be coaxed out of Papadopoulos by a Clinton-linked Australian ambassador, Alexander Downer, and that this apparent 'setup' would be the genesis of the FBI's " operation crossfire hurricane " operation against the Trump campaign. ..."
"... We wouldn't know about the role of Fusion GPS - the opposition research firm hired by Hillary Clinton's campaign to commission the Steele dossier. Fusion is also linked to the infamous Trump Tower meeting , and hired Nellie Ohr - the CIA-linked wife of the DOJ's then-#4 employee, Bruce Ohr. Nellie fed her husband Bruce intelligence she had gathered against Trump while working for Fusion , according to transcripts of her closed-door Congressional testimony. ..."
"... Now the dossier -- financed by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee , and compiled by the former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele -- is likely to face new, possibly harsh scrutiny from multiple inquiries . - NYT ..."
"... The report was debunked after internet sleuths traced the IP address to a marketing server located outside Philadelphia, leading Alfa Bank executives to file a lawsuit against Fusion GPS in October 2017, claiming their reputations were harmed by the Steele Dossier. ..."
"... And who placed the Trump-Alfa theory with various media outlets? None other than former FBI counterintelligence officer and Dianne Feinstein aide Dan Jones - who is currently working with Fusion GPS and Steele to continue their Trump-Russia investigation funded in part by George Soros . ..."
"... Of course, when one stops painting with broad brush strokes, it's clear that the dossier was fabricated bullshit. ..."
"... after a nearly two-year investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller and roughly 40 FBI agents and other specialists, no evidence was found to support the dossier's wild claims of "DNC moles, Romanian hackers, Russian pensioners, or years of Trump-Putin intelligence trading ," as the Times puts it. ..."
"... As there was spying, there must necessarily also have been channels to get the information thus gathered back to its original buyer - the Clinton campaign. Who passed the information back to Clinton, and what got passed? ..."
"... the NYTt prints all the news a scumbag would. remember Judith Miller, the Zionazi reporter the NYT ..."
"... There was no 'hack.' That is the big, anti-Russia, pro-MIC lie which all the other lies serve. ..."
"... Seth Rich had the means and the motive. So did Imran Awan, but it would make no sense for Awan to turn anything over to wikileaks . . .he would have kept them as insurance. ..."
"... Until the real criminals are processed and the media can be restored you don't have a United States. This corruption is beyond comprehension. You had the (((media)) providing kickbacks to the FBI for leaked information. These bribes are how CNN was on site during Roger Stones invasion. ..."
"... So now the narrative is, "We were wrong about Russian collusion, and that's Russia's fault"?! ..."
As we now shift from the "witch hunt" against Trump to 'investigating the investigators' who spied on him - remember this; Donald
Trump was supposed to lose the 2016 election by almost all accounts. And had Hillary won, as expected, none of this would have seen
the light of day .
We wouldn't know that a Clinton-linked operative, Joseph Mifsud,
seeded Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos with the rumor that Russia had 'Dirt' on Hillary Clinton - which would later be
coaxed out of Papadopoulos by a Clinton-linked Australian ambassador, Alexander Downer, and that this apparent 'setup' would be the
genesis of the FBI's "
operation crossfire hurricane " operation against the Trump campaign.
We wouldn't know about the role of Fusion GPS - the opposition research firm hired by Hillary Clinton's campaign to commission
the Steele dossier. Fusion is also linked to the infamous
Trump Tower meeting , and hired
Nellie Ohr - the CIA-linked wife of the DOJ's then-#4 employee, Bruce Ohr. Nellie fed her husband Bruce intelligence she had
gathered against Trump while working for Fusion ,
according to transcripts of her closed-door Congressional testimony.
And if not for reporting by the Daily
Caller 's Chuck Ross and others, we wouldn't know that the FBI sent a longtime spook, Stefan Halper, to infiltrate and spy on
the Trump campaign - after the Obama DOJ paid him over $400,000
right before the 2016 US election (out of more than $1 million he received while Obama was president).
According to the New
York Times , the tables are turning, starting with the Steele Dossier.
[T]he release on Thursday of
by the special counsel , Robert S. Mueller III, underscored what had grown clearer for months -- that while many Trump aides
had welcomed contacts with the Russians, some of the most sensational claims in the dossier appeared to be false, and others were
impossible to prove . Mr. Mueller's report contained over a dozen passing references to the document's claims but no overall assessment
of why so much did not check out.
While Congressional Republicans have vowed to investigate, the DOJ's Inspector General is considering whether the FBI improperly
relied on the dossier when they used it to apply for a surveillance warrant on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. The IG also wants
to know about Steele's sources and whether the FBI disclosed any doubts as to the veracity of the dossier .
Attorney General Barr, meanwhile, said he will review the FBI's conduct in the Russia investigation after saying the agency
spied on the Trump
Doubts over the dossier
The FBI's scramble to vet the dossier's claims are well known. According to an April, 2017
NYT report , the FBI agreed
to pay Steele $50,000 for "solid corroboration" of his claims . Steele was apparently unable to produce satisfactory evidence - and
was ultimately not paid for his efforts:
Mr. Steele met his F.B.I. contact in Rome in early October, bringing a stack of new intelligence reports. One, dated Sept.
14, said that Mr. Putin was facing "fallout" over his apparent involvement in the D.N.C. hack and was receiving "conflicting advice"
on what to do.
The agent said that if Mr. Steele could get solid corroboration of his reports, the F.B.I. would pay him $50,000 for his efforts,
according to two people familiar with the offer. Ultimately, he was not paid . -
Still, the FBI used the dossier to obtain the FISA warrant on Page - while the document itself was heavily shopped around to various
media outlets . The late Sen. John McCain provided a copy to Former FBI Director James Comey, who already had a version, and briefed
President Trump on the salacious document. Comey's briefing to Trump was then used by CNN and BuzzFeed to justify reporting on and
publishing the dossier following the election.
Let's not forget that in October, 2016, both Hillary Clinton and her campaign chairman John Podesta promoted the conspiracy theory
that a secret Russian server was communicating with Trump Tower.
The report was debunked after internet sleuths traced the IP address to a marketing server located outside Philadelphia, leading
Alfa Bank executives to file a lawsuit against Fusion GPS in October 2017, claiming their reputations were harmed by the Steele Dossier.
And who placed the Trump-Alfa theory with various media outlets? None other than former FBI counterintelligence officer and Dianne
Feinstein aide Dan Jones - who is currently working with Fusion GPS and Steele to continue their Trump-Russia investigation funded
in part by
George Soros .
Russian tricks? The Times notes that Steele "has not ruled out" that he may have been fed Russian disinformation while assembling his dossier.
That would mean that in addition to carrying out an effective attack on the Clinton campaign, Russian spymasters hedged their
bets and placed a few land mines under Mr. Trump's presidency as well.
Oleg D. Kalugin, a former K.G.B. general who now lives outside Washington, saw that as plausible. "Russia has huge experience
in spreading false information," he said. -
In short, Steele is being given an 'out' with this admission.
A lawyer for Fusion GPS, Joshua Levy, says that the Mueller report substantiated the "core reporting" in the Steele memos - namely
that "Trump campaign figures were secretly meeting Kremlin figures," and that Russia's president, Vladimir V. Putin, had directed
"a covert operation to elect Donald J. Trump."
Of course, when one stops painting with broad brush strokes, it's clear that the dossier was fabricated bullshit.
The dossier tantalized Mr. Trump's opponents with a worst-case account of the president's conduct. And for those trying to
make sense of the Trump-Russia saga, the dossier infused the quest for understanding with urgency.
In blunt prose, it suggested that a foreign power had fully compromised the man who would become the next president of the
The Russians, it asserted, had tried winning over Mr. Trump with real estate deals in Moscow -- which he had not taken up --
and set him up with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel in 2013, filming the proceedings for future exploitation. A handful of aides
were described as conspiring with the Russians at every turn.
Mr. Trump, it said, had moles inside the D.N.C. The memos claimed that he and the Kremlin had been exchanging intelligence
for eight years and were using Romanian hackers against the Democrats , and that Russian pensioners in the United States were
running a covert communications network . -
And after a nearly two-year investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller and roughly 40 FBI agents and other specialists, no
evidence was found to support the dossier's wild claims of "DNC moles, Romanian hackers, Russian pensioners, or years of Trump-Putin
intelligence trading ," as the Times puts it.
Now that the shoe is on the other foot, and key Democrats backing away from talks of impeachment, let's see if lady justice will
follow the rest of us down the rabbit hole.
This is why the whole FISA court is a joke. What is their remedy if their power is abused? What happens. Well,... the FISA
courts was lied to and found out about it in the early 2000's. Mueller was FBI chief. So they got a strongly worded dressing-down,
a mark in their permanent record from high school, and NO ONE was fired... no one was sanctioned, no agent was transferred to
Fast forward 10 or 12 years and the FBI is doing this **** again. Lying to the court... you know the court where there are
no Democrat judges or Republican judges.. they are all super awesome.... and what is the remedy when the FISA court is told they've
been lied to by the FBI and used in a intel operation with MI6, inserting assets, into a freaking domestic Presidential campaign!!!
and then they WON. Good god.
And what do we hear from our court? Nadda. Do we hear of some Federal Judges hauling FBI and DOJ folks in front of them and
throwing them in jail? Nope. It appears from here... that our Federal Justices are corrupt and have no problem letting illegal
police-state actions go on with ZERO accountability or recourse. They could care less evidently. It's all secret you know... trust
us they say.. Why aren't these judges publicly making loud noises about how the judiciary is complicit , with the press, in wholesale
spying and leaking for political reasons AND a coup attempt when the wrong guy won.???
Where is awesome Justice Roberts? Why isn't he throwing down some truth on just how compromised the rule of law in his courts
clearly are in the last 10 years? The FISA court is his baby. It does no good for them to assure us they are concerned too, and
they've taken action and sent strongly worded letters. Pisses me off. ? Right? heck of rant...
When did Russians interfere in our elections?? 2016. Who was president when Russians interfered with elections?? oobama. Who
was head of the CIA?? Brennan. Who was National Intelligence director?? Clapper. Who was head of the FBI when the Russians interfered
in our elections?? Comey. The pattern is obvious. When Trump was a private citizen the oobama and all his cabinet appointees and
Intel Managers had their hands on all the levers and instruments of Government..and did nothing . Your oobama is guilty of treason
and failing his Oath Of Office...everybody knows this.
This article is still a roundabout gambit to blame Russia.
Fair enough, where's Bill Browder? In England. Browder's allegations were utilized to try and damage Russia, even though Russia
(not the USSR), is about the most reliable friend America has.
Russia helped Lincoln, and were it not for that crucial help, there'd be no America to sanction Russia today. The Tsar paid
for that help with his dynasty, when Nicholas II was murdered, and dethroned.
Americans are truly ungrateful brutes..
Now, sanctions, opprobrium, and hatred are heaped on Russia, most cogently by chauvinistic racists, who look down their noses
at Rus (Russ) and yet, cannot sacrifice 25 millions of their own people, for the sake of others.
Russians are considered subhuman, and yet, the divine spark of humanity resides solely in their breasts. The zionists claim
a false figure of 6 million for a faux holocaust, and yet, nobody pays attention to the true holocaust of 25 millions, or the
many millions before that disastrous instigated war.
That the Russians are childlike, believing others to be like them, loyal, self sacrificing, and generous, has now brought the
world to the brink of armageddon, and still, they bear the burden of proof, though their accusers, who ought provide the evidence,
are bereft of any..
Thomas Jefferson it was, who observing whatever he observed, exclaimed in cogent agitation, that "I fear for my countrymen,
when I remember that God is Just, and His Justice does not repose forever".
Investigate Jared and Ivanka Kushner, along with Charles Kushner, and much ought be clear, no cheers...
I don't buy that "Few bad apples at the top", "Good rank and file" Argument. I have never seen one. We should assume everyone
from the top to the bottom of FBI, DOJ, and State, just to get started, probably every other three better agency is bad. At least
incompotent, at worst treasonous.
As there was spying, there must necessarily also have been channels to get the information thus gathered back to its original
buyer - the Clinton campaign. Who passed the information back to Clinton, and what got passed?
the NYTt prints all the news a scumbag would. remember Judith Miller, the Zionazi reporter the NYT used to push
the Iraq war with all sorts of ********? after the war was determined to be started under a false premise and became common knowledge
there were no wmds in iraq the nyt came forward and reported the war was ******** as if they were reporting breaking news.
they have done the same thing here. they pushed the russiagate story with both barrels even though the informed populace knew
it was ******** before trump was sworn in as potus. now that the all the holes in the story are readily apparent the nyt comes
forward with breaking revelation that something is wrong with the story.
The Seth Rich investigation; where is it now? Murder of a campaign staffer; tampering with or influencing an election, is it
not? Hmmm... When nine hundred years old you become, look this good you will not.
Until the real criminals are processed and the media can be restored you don't have a United States. This corruption is
beyond comprehension. You had the (((media)) providing kickbacks to the FBI for leaked information. These bribes are how CNN was
on site during Roger Stones invasion.
Treason and Sedition is rampant in America and all SPY roads lead to Clapper, Brennan and Obama...This needs attention.
The media is abusive and narrating attacks on a dully elected president
"... This is one of the biggest problems with mainstream media these days. They just give out fake stories or tailor-made stories out there and people on social media latch on to the stories without actually trying to find out what really happened. ..."
"... I've never thought of there being an antisemitism crisis in the Labour party but rather think of it as part of a concerted attack on anyone opposing Israeli policy towards Palestinians, occupied territories and so on. ..."
In the article, Buzzfeed reporters Jason Leopold and Anthony Cormier claim to have been
told, by two anonymous sources, that Robert Mueller's "Russiagate" investigation had evidence
Donald Trump had instructed his lawyer to lie to Congress. That would be a felony, and
obviously an impeachable offence.
The reaction of the news media and associated twitterati was as quick as it was predictable.
MSNCBC, CNN, the BBC, The Guardian the usual suspects. They were all over it within hours.
BuzzFeed's description of specific statements to the special counsel's office, and
characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael
Cohen's congressional testimony are not accurate,"
Despite this, BuzzFeed is sticking to its guns. Insisting that Mueller's statement is vague,
and therefore does not undercut the heart of their story.
The rest of the mainstream media are sensing the tone though and jumping ship. The
Washington Post – not known for their pro-Trump slant –
ran an editorial pointing out the scarcity of Mueller's public comment (this the first
statement Mueller has ever issued concerning evidence or claims in the press), and arguing that
the rush to refute the BuzzFeed article means it is probably completely false.
Nevertheless, BuzzFeed has not retracted or altered their story in any way – except
for putting in one small paragraph reporting that Mueller's office disputes their story. There
is no note of the update, and the rest of the story
remains unchanged .
The article claimed Trump's campaign manager Paul Manafort had met with Julian Assange at
least three times prior to the 2016 Presidential Election. No evidence was produced, save the
word of "unnamed intelligence officials", "secret Ecuadorian documents" and the like. While the
predictable news outlets picked up the story and ran with it with the eagerness of a
6-month-old Golden Retriever,
we in the alternative media were quick to point out the logical and factual deficiencies in
Within hours, The Guardian had edited its language to be rather more circumspect , and
include the denials made by both accused parties. The edits made to the article were not noted
or highlighted in any way, we only know they exist because of internet archives. The next day
The Guardian released a brief, terse, defensive statement. That statement was itself
refuted by both Manafort and WikiLeaks. As of today, WikiLeaks is actively pursuing legal
action in this case.
Later, it was revealed that a key contributor to the story had been previously been
convicted of forgery .
No apology has been made, and no retraction issued, no explanation given. Both the editor,
Katherine Viner, and Luke Harding have been totally silent on the topic.
So, in the last 2 months both Buzzfeed and The Guardian have issued "BREAKING NEWS"
stories that made bold claims, but were not backed up with any evidence. Both these stories
were shown to be untrue in less than 24 hours.
Anonymous sources are a common area here – both stories rely exclusively on the word
of "unnamed sources" from either "the intelligence services" or "government agencies".
Anonymous sources are the batarangs on the propagandist's utility belt. Flexible, simple,
Anonymity allows government agencies to leak misinformation on purpose, without hurting
their credibility. It allows newspapers to control public opinion without having any actual
facts on hand. It allows intelligence agencies to plant narratives they may want to revisit, or
to give targets of blackmail operations a warning. And, most obviously, it allows journalists
to simply make stuff up.
I don't know which specific class these two stories fall into – but I do know it's one
or all of them.
So we come to the question of motive: BuzzFeed and The Guardian must have known there
was no evidence to back up their assertions (yet, anyway). They must know the
"significant minority" of the population who believe "conspiracy theories about their own
government" will research and refute these claims.
So why publish them?
Well, in the Guardian's case, every story demonising Assange discredits WikiLeaks'
future output, whilst also softening public sympathy for Assange in preparation for potential
extradition of to the US. All the mainstream press have turned on WikiLeaks, but The
Guardian – for some reason – has a particularly strong institutional axe to
grind with WikiLeaks, and specifically Julian Assange.
Similarly, every "Russia bad!" story primes the public to accept increased defence spending,
increased control of the internet by the government and increased social media censorship. It
is very much the gift that keeps on giving in that regard.
In BuzzFeed's case, it has been apparent for a while now that the Mueller investigation is
likely to fizzle. Articles and interviews from various media sources have been prepping the
public for a "let
down" for a few weeks. At this point, there is no case for impeaching Trump. But the Deep
State still needs to keep him over a barrel.
Trump has been a disappointment to his base and is yet to implement half the policies he
discussed on the campaign trail, but he's not fully and totally being controlled by the
warhawking Deep State yet, either. His policy of peace with North Korea and decisions to pull
out of Syria and Afghanistan show that there is a tug-of-war ongoing inside the administration.
It's probably no coincidence that this latest of many "bombshells" comes so quickly on the heels of
Trump's announcement of the Syria withdrawal.
Careful "leaks", planted stories and social media witch-hunts remind Trump how precarious
his position is, whilst simultaneously distracting the public – both pro-Trump and
anti-Trump – from real issues.
The case-specific "why?" doesn't matter so much as the general aim of this type of
manipulation. The important question is: Why does the media tell lies if they know they will be
revealed as such?
Clearly, the lies serve a purpose, regardless of their retraction or qualification.
Telling a lie loudly and then taking it back quietly is an old propaganda trick – it
allows the paper to maintain a facade of "accountability". The point of this practice is to
propagate lies into the public consciousness. It's a method that can be used to distract and
disseminate and divide.
The accuracy of the statement is immaterial. The point is, once it has been said it cannot
be unsaid. There are countless examples: "Assange was working for Russia", "Trump ordered
Cohen to lie to Congress", "Russia hacked the US election", "Donald Trump worked for the KGB",
"Assad gassed his own people", "Jeremy Corbyn is an antisemite".
The list goes on and on and on. None these have been proven. All were asserted without
evidence, fiercely defended as facts, and then discretely qualified.
That is the purpose of "fake news", to forge the Empire's
"created reality" , and force us all to live in it. These are world-shaping,
policy-informing, news-dominating narratives and are nothing but feathers in the wind .
A perfect examplar of this occurred just two days ago on the BBC's flagship Political debate
show Question Time :
The (notionally impartial) host not only sided with right-wing author Isabel Oakeshott in
criticising Labour's polling, but then joined in mocking the Labour MP Diane Abbott for
attempting to correct the record.
Both Oakeshott and Fiona Bruce, the host, were
factually incorrect – as shown a hundred times over since. But that doesn't matter.
The lie was told, the audience laughed, the reality was created. "Labour are behind in the
polls, anybody who says otherwise is a laughingstock" .
The lie goes around the world while the truth is still putting its boots on.
That's why fake news is so important to them, and so dangerous us.
Kit Knightly is co-editor of OffGuardian. The Guardian banned him from commenting. Twice. He
used to write for fun, but now he's forced to out of a near-permanent sense of outrage.
This is one of the biggest problems with mainstream media these days. They just give out
fake stories or tailor-made stories out there and people on social media latch on to the
stories without actually trying to find out what really happened.
This is not the first time BuzzFeed it issuing an article like this one by now it has developed a reputation for
propagating facts that are untrue. It is said to see what our media houses have come down too, gone are the days when news
reports were based on facts.
Here's a short piece on Muralgate as part of Israeli information warfare:
Was the antisemitism crisis in the UK Labour Party designed as a distraction from Gaza?
Very early on some complained that Jeremy Corbyn was a victim of a smear campaign, but
might it be more accurate to say that UK politics witnessed a deliberate smokescreen? As
controversial as this narrative is, I think that all the evidence points in that
I've never thought of there being an antisemitism crisis in the Labour party but rather
think of it as part of a concerted attack on anyone opposing Israeli policy towards
Palestinians, occupied territories and so on. There's two reasons for this; one being that
the intellectual base of left wing politics has historically has always included a lot of
Jewish thinkers. The other is that we don't have a Labour party here in the US but any organization that's critical of these
policies gets tarred in exactly the same way. Its a lazy 'fill in the blanks' approach that obviously does the job (because
the media just takes up the banner and runs with it, it doesn't hang around to ask questions) but at the same time its
really easy to see through if you know what to look for.
Buzzfeed is a complete scam. I remember the night of the Presidential election their running vote tallies were completely
false – they had Hillary Clinton leading the whole time. They know exactly what they are doing. It's not like they are
BuzzFeed is a useful outlet for fake news because no intelligent person takes the zine
seriously. But CNN/MSNBC/etc. consumers only see hear the manic assertions and miss where
the 'news' came from then later miss the corrections. If Brian Stelter is later pressed he
can say "Well, it's BuzzFeed, I mean, come on. CNN had nothing to do with it." BuzzFeed
says a couple of prostitutes peed on a bed to amuse Trump, the story is discredited, but a
lot of people still believe it. And on and on.
Now the story that Trump hat wearing high school kids were harassing black people who
were quoting the Bible – and then laughed at an old Native American who stepped in to
prevent the kids from assaulting the blacks – is falling apart. Seems odd that
Anderson Cooper or Don Lemon haven't invited the Black Israelites on to talk about civil
rights in 2019 – especially LGBT rights and anti-antisemitism..
This is the classic way to insert stories in the main stream media. You use postings on
Internet sites which reverberate -- they get reposted (which you may do a bit of as well)
so they build up a veneer of credibility. They are then quoted as "authoritative" by more
The technique isn't new and its not confined to politics. This is how product marketing
works, using a combination of press releases, 'leaks', 'exclusive access' and so on to get
'buzz' about the product. As with politics it often finds itself in a gray area where it
might be marketing a product that doesn't exist (yet), often to forestall a competitor's
advantage. (Disclaimer -- I've never worked in marketing but I have spent my working life
developing products and technologies. Sometimes what gets published about what you and your
colleagues have developed is a bit of a surprise ..but that's just how business
Good article Kit, just please correct the few times where I thought you missed a word. "All were asserted without evidence,
fiercely defended as facts, and then discretely qualified." Did you not mean disqualified? Similarly at the very end.
The creation of chaos appears to be the aim.
And it's working just fine.
When it gets bad enough, the engineers of the chaos just move in and reorganize things the
way they have always wanted them.
It's what I would do if I were a soulless, incompetent fathead.
Any idea what Cadwalladr is on about in her latest tweet?
A girlfriend of an oligarch manhandled at a Moscow airport?
Still no mention of II/IoS and Caroles links with them and their anti Russian
She mentions the usual bogeymen , trump, mannafort, farage, but not Murdoch, Mandy,
Blair or Tory MP's.
Meanwhile the plot of a coup to by-pass parliamentry democracy reaches a denoument this
week – all the neocon/lib forces are to be marshalled under the patrician Grieve and
Cooper along with all the right-thinking forces of the land in the final fight between to
regain the land for Mordor. A unholy alliance of the Willing to stop the Corbynite Hobbits
ridding the land of the ancient powers!
Latest bit of fake news by the Groaniad
'May's move comes as fresh polling evidence suggests the public are sanguine about the
possibility of a no-deal Brexit.
A poll by ICM conducted in the wake of last week's historic government defeat and seen by
the Guardian asked voters what should happen next.'
"seen by the Guardian" "the public are sangunie"
Look into my mystical crystal bowl eyes, you are sanguine, sanguine !
Do they even know what 'sanguine' means?
Dear Off-G you could do with a perma link to the ticker tape of all the twaddle the
Obssesive Groaniad prints, we could all contribute.
"Dear Off-G you could do with a perma link to the ticker tape of all the twaddle the
Obssesive Groaniad prints, we could all contribute "
Yes. The obvious course is for OG to take on the task of exposing Hte Garuniad's lies and
manipulations, in real time.
Not that this is a criticism of the excellent work currently being done.
"The lie goes around the world while the truth is still putting its boots on."
This is one of the most pertinant phrases today, particularly with the speed of modern
communications. The lies which led to the invasion of Iraq, the lies around so called
chemical weapons attacks, the lies about the White Helmets, the media lies which lead to
the demonisation of Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott
If the media keeps on propagating lies and misinformation, then we could find ourselves on
the brink of a final catastrophic war.
Illusions operate in place of true for that is their function, given them by those who hold
Belief you are separate (from life – each other and world) is the belief that truth
is different for each one and that there is a hierarchy of illusions – where some are
held as more true than others. Each must establish this for themself by attack on others to
make their own true.
The errors seen in others are thus always a call for attack and not for undoing, healing or
The mind is thus set at war with itself by war of self-reinforcing self-illusion with
obviously distressing results to the willingness to those who give reality to its dictate.
If you see the underlying principles of a mind at war with (in active denial of) living
truth, are recognisably insane but normal premise to human confusion, then you are no
longer altogether listening to confusion.
That there is fear of truth in us would be more evident if we were not so active in the
engagement within illusions as if some illusions can be victorious over other
The mind of deceit seems to be the saviour from confusion, while actually protecting and
persisting it as the sin seen or flagged onto others. This protects 'sin' or irrevocable
guilt that calls for punishment, as the framework of perception by the attempt to put it
out on another and MAKE it true.
But then an underlying fear of truth is magnified by the fear that what we thought to
get rid of, will come back to us and damn us. Which will SEEM true while we persist in
seeing errors as uncorrectable AND as the means to protect and maintain defences for a
false sense of possession and control.
Insane defences protect insanity against healing.
There is a work I companion with over many years as a daily inspiration that I associate
with synchronicity of recognition or resonance of what is apparently going on, with
emerging perspective of desire to see – rather than persistence in habits and
patterns of thought that are brought to light by choosing not to automatically react as if
Illusions cannot 'save themselves' by struggle or assertion. But any awakening point of
recognition of false as false is an opportunity to simply call on truth instead of trying
to make true.
"Survival' within a battle of illusions is seeking a 'better' illusion within a
self-damnation that can only arrive at its starting place. Releasing this as the point from
which to receive identity is through the willingness or choice NOT to use it by opening to
another in desire for a peace of being that is prior to – or beneath – the
coverings of a buzz feed of fake news.
Questioning what we are, made a questionable mind and gave it the time of day to rob us of
the joy in the day thereof. Another way to say this – is the interjecting of the mind
of thought and control upon the flow of communication and relation that life already is the
being and sharing of – as a 'self-consciousness' of inhibition and division.
This curious capacity to become both subject and object – and as if separate from
fearful life – is associated with lack of power and lack of love by the drive to then
regain it or protect the little we hath from a sense of total loss.
Edward Bernays, Walter Lippmann, Joseph Goebbels, Luke Harding (and his many vile clones in the Western media) Manufacturing
Consent . You nail it Kit in one single article. The phrase 'created reality' says it all. Sort of a bit like the 2 minutes
of hate thing from that famous book. And of course, now the slime have NewsGuard ready to roll out as well as many having
their Facebook and Twitter accounts suspended or terminated. Incidentally, my Facebook account has been suspended 5-6 times
now for 'breaching community standards'.
Another good bit of recent news misinformation was the story about the Chinese 'spy chip'
that was embedded into server motherboards made in China. This story was well debunked by
the technical community -- the general response was a combination of "If it was in the SKU
we'd have noticed it" and "this is one fantastic part, where can I buy some?" but the story
will still come up if you do a search on "Chinese spy chip" rather than the (numerous)
More sinister, and more important, is the global campaign against Huewei. You'll find
numerous instances of countries banning their equipment because of fears that its spying
for China, something the company has been at pains to prove false. There's two levels to
this, though. One is the normal Cold War/Chinese intellectual property theft stuff, the
other is commercial. Huawei is currently in a position to supply what's called '5G'
wireless equipment, not just the phones but the entire infrastructure that's needed to make
them work. US companies are somewhat behind in their ability to deploy this technology so
it has become necessary to slow or eliminate the competition by political rather than
technical means. There's a lot of money at stake, and as we know from the so-called energy
sector threatening the hegemony has already caused several wars, coups and what-have-you so
its not inconceivable that a similar measures might have to be taken with this technology.
(There's more than money at stake as well -- control of the technology is vital if you want
to use it for spying. Spying? Everyone does, in fact its gone commercial with the
personalization of advertising, its just a question of who gets to reap the
Aside from the aforementioned warnings about HUAWEI' s ability to competively and
profitably manufacture and markert so-called fifth generation wireless telephony systems
and products, which are surely based upon simply; jealous commercial slander by Huawei's
More important is the strange fact that this " fifth generation wireless technology "
has not been to be a safe, or even a practical technology, by any of the necessary and
acceptable ITU approved standards organisations.
This is more than a source of health and safety concerns all of the population most
widely, and is still without he necessary approvals which are still absent, and thus it is
an urgent matter for official precautions with health and safety, given the wide scope of
this high-speed and wide-band emmission radio wave technology?
So called "5G" encompasses a whole basket of technologies, some established and some still
being tested. The role of the ITU is to set overall parameters for the technology with
other industry groups dealing with the details. The process is well established, its used
by all complex technologies that have to interoperate globally, and it invariably ends up
with some kind of patent basket where participants share technologies (and spoils). (I've
been involved peripherally in similar sorts of activities in the past so I've seen how
these groups work.)
Since this technology is evolutionary rather than revolutionary its likely that
equipment manufacturers will deliver it in phases so the race is to get your equipment
placed because it can always be upgraded later (typically this will be firmware updates for
the infrastructure kit). Here you notice that two of the big players in this are Chinese,
they just happen to be ZTE and Huawei. One of the other players is Qualcomm, a company that
you may not be familiar with but essentially had a stranglehold on previous generation
wireless technology through its IP portfolio (it derives most of its income from licensing
rather than manufacturing). Anyone who works in this business and figure out two plus two
knows exactly what's going on when the US government goes after Chinese manufacturers and
spying, health and safety and what-have-you are definitely not the real reasons. (the
H&S angle I've not heard of but since 5G will mostly use existing frequencies there's
no change -- anyway the whole electromagnetic radiation thing is one of those voodoo things
put out by people who never studied physics at school or beyond)(we can put this into
another thread, it doesn't belong here).
In many aspects of mobile technology the Chinese are, unfortunately, light years of us.
(So are the Koreans, BTW.) Its a hard truth but one we must face if we're to do anything
about being competitive.
Years ago, a British company called Sportingbet was cornering the market for bets placed
over the internet, punters could use credit cards, the Americans were caught unprepared,
hastily put together a statute that got attached to another one (which was debated certain
to pass) only hours before voting.
At a stroke, the new law cut off the US punters, the share price of Sporting plummeted,
eventually remnants of the company got sold. Within months, an American company emerged, no
problem with using credit card placing bets. (The story's more complex, arrests of
Sportingbet execs are a part of it, but the substance of it that matters is as Baron
That's what the American business does, it's ruthless beyond one's
These smears are all small change by US standards They are the daily fare of what passes
for a political system.
Some recent far more entertaining smears:-
Barack Obomber is a Muslim illegal alien.
His wife, Michelle, is really a man.
Clinton is dead. Her place has been taken by a body double.
Trump is having an incestuous relationship with his daughter.
Melania is a hooker.
One Presidential candidate in the 1800s put it about that his opponent had just died.
You can't vote for him, he's dead. Vote for me instead.
Britain clearly falls way behind in the smear stakes.
The best they can come up with is Steele's Golden Showers and Jezza is an anti Semite. How
pathetic is that?
The BBC / Diane Abbott story is more interesting when you read reports that the host wound
up the audience pre-show to get them to have a go at Ms Abbottt. One person described it as
a 'roast'. The BBC has some serious credibility issues these days (John Reith must be
spinning in his grave something rotten -- he established the idea that the BBC should be
impartial, establishing a reputation that's been ruthlessly exploited and totally sullied
in recent years).
Planting stories in credulous or complicit media relies on journalists who might know
how to write but know nothing about what they're writing about. They'll turn out copy on
anything without asking questions. There are some, though, that seem to want to understand
the story, that will ask questions and so on. We have to seek them out and -- most
important -- find a way of paying them because while media is entirely dependent on
eyeballs and clicks for income its essentially compromised. (See the articles in the
current edition of "Time" magazine about digital media -- they're an important
"We have to seek them out and -- most important -- find a way of paying them"
Via Off-Guardian and similar platforms?
As you say, it is indeed up to us. We have to put our money where our mouth is and
develop an alternative, as-incorruptible-as-possible media platform that serious
journalists can join. Thousands of people contributing a pound a month is a start, tens and
hundreds of thousands would make a real difference.
So disinherit Auntie, stop paying the licence fee, and redirect you monies to where the
truth get told.
Quoted tweet: Ollie Richardson 7h
"The funniest thing about GiletsJaunes: At no point in the Syrian war did the Syrian people
march on the streets and chant "Assad is a dictator". But today the French people are on
French streets calling Macron & Co dictators"
[Vexarb adds: The Yellow Jerkins shout, "Macron Must Go" -- facing tear gas, truncheons,
armoured cars and lethal weapons deployed by the Rothschild Regime.]
"That is the purpose of "fake news", to forge the Empire's "created reality", and force us
all to live in it." – author
Here in the U.S. the deep state is working hard with "business" to limit access to any
progressive media that might challenge the "Empire's created reality." Offering software to
public libraries that facilitate suppressing the truth in favor of the empire's lie.
Capitalism and the military state at work, joined at the hip. I believe that fits Benito's
definition of "fascism" quite nicely.
"A moderate House of Cards the greatest wit / Though he can start it cannot finish it." --
Wolfgang von Goethe, German scientist.
I am re-posting the following extract from previous thread, "Curious Bedfellows",
because it is relevant to the present thread on Brassy, Barefaced Lying by criminal
"andrew belshaw Jan, 17, 2019
USA and Israel planned and carried out the FALSE FLAG 9/11 Attacks–
then blamed Afghananistan, Iraq, etc
FBI named their 9/11 investigation PENTTBOM
for PENtagon Twin Towers BOMbing
So where are the FBI explosive tests???
WHERE ARE THE FBI TESTS FOR EXPLOSIVES???
vexarb Jan, 18, 2019
Andrew, do you imply that the FBI actually tested for explosives -- and their report has
Or do you mean the FBI, like the committee which issued the Official Report, avoided the
usual test for explosives in cases where modern buildings fall down?
I ask for clarification because I read at the time that the FBI said, they had no
evidence against Osama Ben Laden or Saddam Hussein.
axisofoil Jan, 19, 2019
The FBI did extensive and thorough forensics and sample testing from the crime scene of
9/11 with the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The molecular examination of
the remains and dust was conducted to the nano level. An admirable undertaking. The
thoroughly documented results were printed up at a cost of over 8 Million tax payer
dollars. _The documents were unfortunately misplaced._ the cost to duplicate the tests was
deemed too much of a financial burden on the American public by law makers."
"... John Pilger, among few others, has already stressed how a plan to destroy WikiLeaks and Julian Assange was laid out as far back as 2008 – at the tail end of the Cheney regime – concocted by the Pentagon's shady Cyber Counter-Intelligence Assessments Branch. ..."
"... But it was only in 2017, in the Trump era, that the Deep State went totally ballistic; that's when WikiLeaks published the Vault 7 files – detailing the CIA's vast hacking/cyber espionage repertoire. ..."
"... This was the CIA as a Naked Emperor like never before – including the dodgy overseeing ops of the Center for Cyber Intelligence, an ultra-secret NSA counterpart. ..."
"... The monolithic narrative by the Deep State faction aligned with the Clinton machine was that "the Russians" hacked the DNC servers. Assange was always adamant; that was not the work of a state actor – and he could prove it technically. ..."
"... The DoJ wanted a deal – and they did make an offer to WikiLeaks. But then FBI director James Comey killed it. The question is why. ..."
"... Some theoretically sound reconstructions of Comey's move are available. But the key fact is Comey already knew – via his close connections to the top of the DNC – that this was not a hack; it was a leak. ..."
"... Ambassador Craig Murray has stressed, over and over again (see here ) how the DNC/Podesta files published by WikiLeaks came from two different US sources; one from within the DNC and the other from within US intel. ..."
"... he release by WikiLeaks in April 2017 of the malware mechanisms inbuilt in "Grasshopper" and the "Marble Framework" were indeed a bombshell. This is how the CIA inserts foreign language strings in source code to disguise them as originating from Russia, from Iran, or from China. The inestimable Ray McGovern, a VIPS member, stressed how Marble Framework "destroys this story about Russian hacking." ..."
"... No wonder then CIA director Mike Pompeo accused WikiLeaks of being a "non-state hostile intelligence agency" ..."
"... Joshua Schulte, the alleged leaker of Vault 7, has not faced a US court yet. There's no question he will be offered a deal by the USG if he aggress to testify against Julian Assange. ..."
"... George Galloway has a guest who explains it all https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VvPFMyPvHM&t=8s ..."
"... Escobar is brain dead if he can't figure out that Trumpenstein is totally on board with destroying Assange. As if bringing on pukes like PompAss, BoltON, and Abrams doesn't scream it. ..."
The Made-by-FBI indictment of
Julian Assange does look like a dead man walking. No evidence. No documents. No surefire
testimony. Just a crossfire of conditionals...
But never underestimate the legalese contortionism of US government (USG) functionaries. As
much as Assange may not be characterized as a journalist and publisher, the thrust of the
affidavit is to accuse him of conspiring to commit espionage.
In fact the charge is not even that Assange hacked a USG computer and obtained classified
information; it's that he may have discussed it with Chelsea Manning and may have had the
intention to go for a hack. Orwellian-style thought crime charges don't get any better than
that. Now the only thing missing is an AI software to detect them.
Assange legal adviser Geoffrey Robertson – who also happens to represent another
stellar political prisoner, Brazil's Lula – cut
straight to the chase (at 19:22 minutes);
"The justice he is facing is justice, or injustice, in America I would hope the British
judges would have enough belief in freedom of information to throw out the extradition
That's far from a done deal. Thus the inevitable consequence; Assange's legal team is
getting ready to prove, no holds barred, in a British court, that this USG indictment for
conspiracy to commit computer hacking is just an hors d'oeuvre for subsequent espionage
charges, in case Assange is extradited to US soil.
All about Vault 7
John Pilger, among few others, has already stressed how a plan to
destroy WikiLeaks and Julian Assange was laid out as far back as 2008 – at the tail end
of the Cheney regime – concocted by the Pentagon's shady Cyber Counter-Intelligence
It was all about criminalizing WikiLeaks and personally smearing Assange, using "shock
troops enlisted in the media -- those who are meant to keep the record straight and tell us the
This plan remains more than active – considering how Assange's arrest has been covered
by the bulk of US/UK mainstream media.
By 2012, already in the Obama era, WikiLeaks detailed the astonishing "scale of the US Grand
Jury Investigation" of itself. The USG always denied such a grand jury existed.
"The US Government has stood up and coordinated a joint interagency criminal investigation
of Wikileaks comprised of a partnership between the Department of Defense (DOD) including:
CENTCOM; SOUTHCOM; the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA); Defense Information Systems Agency
(DISA); Headquarters Department of the Army (HQDA); US Army Criminal Investigation Division
(CID) for USFI (US Forces Iraq) and 1st Armored Division (AD); US Army Computer Crimes
Investigative Unit (CCIU); 2nd Army (US Army Cyber Command); Within that or in addition,
three military intelligence investigations were conducted. Department of Justice (DOJ) Grand
Jury and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of State (DOS) and Diplomatic
Security Service (DSS). In addition, Wikileaks has been investigated by the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), Office of the National CounterIntelligence
Executive (ONCIX), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA); the House Oversight Committee; the
National Security Staff Interagency Committee, and the PIAB (President's Intelligence
But it was only in 2017, in the Trump era, that the Deep State went totally ballistic;
that's when WikiLeaks published the Vault 7 files – detailing the CIA's vast
hacking/cyber espionage repertoire.
This was the CIA as a Naked Emperor like never before – including the dodgy
overseeing ops of the Center for Cyber Intelligence, an ultra-secret NSA counterpart.
WikiLeaks got Vault 7 in early 2017. At the time WikiLeaks had already published the DNC
files – which the unimpeachable Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
systematically proved was a leak, not a hack.
The monolithic narrative by the Deep State faction aligned with the Clinton machine was
that "the Russians" hacked the DNC servers. Assange was always adamant; that was not the work
of a state actor – and he could prove it technically.
There was some movement towards a deal, brokered by one of Assange's lawyers; WikiLeaks
would not publish the most damning Vault 7 information in exchange for Assange's safe passage
to be interviewed by the US Department of Justice (DoJ).
The DoJ wanted a deal – and they did make an offer to WikiLeaks. But then FBI
director James Comey killed it. The question is why.
It's a leak, not a hack
Some theoretically sound
reconstructions of Comey's move are available. But the key fact is Comey already knew
– via his close connections to the top of the DNC – that this was not a hack; it
was a leak.
Ambassador Craig Murray has stressed, over and over again (see
here ) how the DNC/Podesta files published by WikiLeaks came from two different US sources;
one from within the DNC and the other from within US intel.
There was nothing for Comey to "investigate". Or there would have, if Comey had ordered the
FBI to examine the DNC servers. So why talk to Julian Assange?
T he release by WikiLeaks in April 2017 of the malware mechanisms inbuilt in
"Grasshopper" and the "Marble Framework" were indeed a bombshell. This is how the CIA inserts
foreign language strings in source code to disguise them as originating from Russia, from Iran,
or from China. The inestimable Ray McGovern, a VIPS member, stressed how Marble Framework
"destroys this story about Russian hacking."
No wonder then CIA director Mike Pompeo accused WikiLeaks of being a "non-state hostile
intelligence agency", usually manipulated by Russia.
Joshua Schulte, the alleged leaker of Vault 7,
has not faced a US court yet. There's no question he will be offered a deal by the USG if he
aggress to testify against Julian Assange.
It's a long and winding road, to be traversed in at least two years, if Julian Assange is
ever to be extradited to the US. Two things for the moment are already crystal clear. The USG
is obsessed to shut down WikiLeaks once and for all. And because of that, Julian Assange will
never get a fair trial in the "so-called 'Espionage Court'" of the Eastern District of
detailed by former CIA counterterrorism officer and whistleblower John Kiriakou.
Meanwhile, the non-stop demonization of Julian Assange will proceed unabated, faithful to
guidelines established over a decade ago. Assange is even accused of being a US intel op, and
WikiLeaks a splinter Deep State deep cover op.
Maybe President Trump will maneuver the hegemonic Deep State into having Assange testify
against the corruption of the DNC; or maybe Trump caved in completely to "hostile intelligence
agency" Pompeo and his CIA gang baying for blood. It's all ultra-high-stakes shadow play
– and the show has not even begun.
Not to mention the Pentagram has silenced 100,000 whistleblower complaints by
Intimidation, threats, money or accidents over 5 years . A Whistleblower only does this when
know there is something seriously wrong. Just Imagine how many knew something was wrong but
looked the other way.
Maybe President Trump will maneuver the hegemonic Deep State into having Assange testify
against the corruption of the DNC; or maybe Trump caved in completely to "hostile
intelligence agency" Pompeo and his CIA gang baying for blood.
Escobar is brain dead if he can't figure out that Trumpenstein is totally on board with
destroying Assange. As if bringing on pukes like PompAss, BoltON, and Abrams doesn't scream it.
assange and wikileaks are the real criminals despite being crimeless. the **** is a
sanctioned criminal, allowed to be criminal with the system because the rest of the
sanctioned criminals would be exposed if she was investigated.
this is not the rule of laws. this is the law of rulers.
"... Sadly, Brennan's propaganda coup only works on what the Bell Curve crowd up there would call the dumbest and most technologically helpless 1.2σ. Here is how people with half a brain interpret the latest CIA whoppers. ..."
"... Convincing Americans in Russia's influence or Russia collusion with Trump was only a tool that would create pressure on Trump that together with the fear of paralysis of his administration and impeachment would push Trump into the corner from which the only thing he could do was to worsen relations with Russia. What American people believe or not is really secondary. With firing of Gen. Flynn Trump acted exactly as they wanted him to act. This was the beginning of downward slope. ..."
"... Anyway, the mission was accomplished and the relations with Russia are worse now than during Obama administration. Trump can concentrate on Iran in which he will be supported by all sides and factions including the media. Even Larry David will approve not only the zionist harpies like Pam Geller, Rita Katz and Ilana Mercer. ..."
"... The only part that is absurd is that Russia posed a bona fide threat to the US. I'm fine with the idea that he ruined Brennen's plans in Syria. But thats just ego we shouldn't have been there anyway. ..."
"... No one really cares about Ukraine. And the European/Russian trade zone? No one cares. The Eurozone has its hands full with Greece and the rest of the old EU. I have a feeling they have already gone way too far and are more likely to shrink than expand in any meaningful way ..."
"... " ..factions within the state whose interests do not coincide with those of the American people." ..."
"... All the more powerfully put because of its recognisably comical. understatement. Thank you Mr Whitney. Brilliant article that would be all over the mainstream media were the US MSM an instrument of American rather than globalist interests. ..."
"... A sad story, how the USA always was a police state, where the two percent rich manipulated the 98% poor, to stay rich. When there were insurrections federal troops restored order. Also FDR put down strikes with troops. ..."
"... The elephant in the room is Israel and the neocons , this is the force that controls America and Americas foreign policy , Brennan and the 17 intel agencies are puppets of the mossad and Israel, that is the brutal fact of the matter. ..."
"... "The absence of evidence suggests that Russia hacking narrative is a sloppy and unprofessional disinformation campaign that was hastily slapped together by over confident Intelligence officials who believed that saturating the public airwaves with one absurd story after another would achieve the desired result " ..."
"... But it DID achieve the desired result! Trump folded under the pressure, and went full out neoliberal. Starting with his missile attack on Syria, he is now OK with spending trillions fighting pointless endless foreign wars on the other side of the world. ..."
"... I think maybe half the US population does believe the Russian hacking thing, but that's not really the issue. I think that the pre-Syrian attack media blitz was more a statement of brute power to Trump: WE are in charge here, and WE can take you down and impeach you, and facts don't matter! ..."
"... Sometimes propaganda is about persuading people. And sometimes, I think, it is about intimidating them. ..."
"... The Brit secret service, in effect, created and trained not merely the CIA but also the Mossad and Saudi Arabia's General Intelligence Presidency. All four are defined by endless lies, endless acts of utterly amoral savagery. All 4 are at least as bad as the KGB ever was, and that means as bad as Hell itself. ..."
"... Traditional triumphalist American narrative history, as taught in schools up through the 60s or so, portrayed America as "wart-free." Since then, with Zinn's book playing a major role, it has increasingly been portrayed as "warts-only," which is of course at least equally flawed. I would say more so. ..."
"... Anyway, the mission was accomplished and the relations with Russia are worse now than during Obama administration. ..."
"... That pre-9/11 "cooperation" nearly destroyed Russia. Nobody in Russia (except, perhaps, for Pussy Riot) wants a return to the Yeltsin era. ..."
"... The CIA is the world largest criminal and terrorist organization. With Brennan the worst has come to the worst. The whole Russian meddling affair was initiated by the Obama/Clinton gang in cooperation with 95 percent of the media. Nothing will come out of it. ..."
"... [The key figures who had primary influence on both Trump's and Bush's Iran policies held views close to those of Israel's right-wing Likud Party. The main conduit for the Likudist line in the Trump White House is Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law, primary foreign policy advisor, and longtime friend and supporter of Netanyahu. Kushner's parents are also long-time supporters of Israeli settlements on the occupied West Bank. ..."
"... Another figure to whom the Trump White House has turned is John Bolton, undersecretary of state and a key policymaker on Iran in the Bush administration. Although Bolton was not appointed Trump's secretary of state, as he'd hoped, he suddenly reemerged as a player on Iran policy thanks to his relationship with Kushner. Politico reports that Bolton met with Kushner a few days before the final policy statement was released and urged a complete withdrawal from the deal in favor of his own plan for containing Iran. ..."
"... Putin's dream of Greater Europe is the death knell for the unipolar world order. It means the economic center of the world will shift to Central Asia where abundant resources and cheap labor of the east will be linked to the technological advances and the Capital the of the west eliminating the need to trade in dollars or recycle profits into US debt. The US economy will slip into irreversible decline, and the global hegemon will steadily lose its grip on power. That's why it is imperative for the US prevail in Ukraine– a critical land bridge connecting the two continents– and to topple Assad in Syria in order to control vital resources and pipeline corridors. Washington must be in a position where it can continue to force its trading partners to denominate their resources in dollars and recycle the proceeds into US Treasuries if it is to maintain its global primacy. The main problem is that Russia is blocking Uncle Sam's path to success which is roiling the political establishment in Washington. ..."
"... Second, Zakharova confirms that the western media is not an independent news gathering organization, but a propaganda organ for the foreign policy establishment who dictates what they can and can't say. ..."
"... Such a truthful portrait of reality ! The ruling elite is indeed massively corrupt, compromised, and controlled by dark forces. And the police state is already here. For most people, so far, in the form of massive collection of personal data and increasing number of mandatory regulations. But just one or two big false-flags away from progressing into something much worse. ..."
"... Clearly the CIA was making war on Syria. Is secret coercive covert action against sovereign nations Ok? Is it legal? When was the CIA designated a war making entity – what part of the constitution OK's that? Isn't the congress obliged by constitutional law to declare war? (These are NOT six month actions – they go on and on.) ..."
"... Syria is only one of many nations that the CIA is attacking – how many countries are we attacking with drones? Where is congress? ..."
"... Close the CIA – give the spying to the 16 other agencies. ..."
Sadly, Brennan's propaganda coup only works on what the Bell Curve crowd up there would call
the dumbest and most technologically helpless 1.2σ. Here is how people with half a
brain interpret the latest CIA whoppers.
Again Mike Whitney does not get it. Though in the first part of the article I thought he
would. He was almost getting there. The objective was to push new administration into the
corner from which it could not improve relations with Russia as Trump indicated that he
wanted to during the campaign.
Convincing Americans in Russia's influence or Russia collusion
with Trump was only a tool that would create pressure on Trump that together with the fear of
paralysis of his administration and impeachment would push Trump into the corner from which
the only thing he could do was to worsen relations with Russia. What American people believe
or not is really secondary. With firing of Gen. Flynn Trump acted exactly as they wanted him
to act. This was the beginning of downward slope.
Anyway, the mission was accomplished and the relations with Russia are worse now than
during Obama administration. Trump can concentrate on Iran in which he will be supported by
all sides and factions including the media. Even Larry David will approve not only the
zionist harpies like Pam Geller, Rita Katz and Ilana Mercer.
The only part that is absurd is that Russia posed a bona fide threat to the US. I'm fine
with the idea that he ruined Brennen's plans in Syria. But thats just ego we shouldn't have
been there anyway.
No one really cares about Ukraine. And the European/Russian trade zone? No one cares. The
Eurozone has its hands full with Greece and the rest of the old EU. I have a feeling they
have already gone way too far and are more likely to shrink than expand in any meaningful
The one thing I am not positive about. If the elite really believe that Russia is a
threat, then Americans have done psych ops on themselves.
The US was only interested in Ukraine because it was there. Next in line on a map. The
rather shocking disinterest in investing money -- on both sides -- is inexplicable if it was
really important. Most of it would be a waste -- but still. The US stupidly spent $5 billion
on something -- getting duped by politicians and got theoretical regime change, but it was
hell to pry even $1 billion for real economic aid.
" ..factions within the state whose interests do not coincide with those of the American
All the more powerfully put because of its recognisably comical. understatement. Thank you Mr Whitney. Brilliant article that would be all over the mainstream media were
the US MSM an instrument of American rather than globalist interests.
I am reading Howard Zinn, A Peoples History of the USA, 1492 to the Present.
A sad story, how the USA always was a police state, where the two percent rich manipulated
the 98% poor, to stay rich.
When there were insurrections federal troops restored order.
Also FDR put down strikes with troops.
The elephant in the room is Israel and the neocons , this is the force that controls America
and Americas foreign policy , Brennan and the 17 intel agencies are puppets of the mossad and
Israel, that is the brutal fact of the matter.
Until that fact changes Americans will continue to fight and die for Israel.
"The absence of evidence suggests that Russia hacking narrative is a sloppy and
unprofessional disinformation campaign that was hastily slapped together by over confident
Intelligence officials who believed that saturating the public airwaves with one absurd story
after another would achieve the desired result "
But it DID achieve the desired result! Trump folded under the pressure, and went full out
neoliberal. Starting with his missile attack on Syria, he is now OK with spending trillions
fighting pointless endless foreign wars on the other side of the world.
I think maybe half the US population does believe the Russian hacking thing, but that's
not really the issue. I think that the pre-Syrian attack media blitz was more a statement of
brute power to Trump: WE are in charge here, and WE can take you down and impeach you, and
facts don't matter!
Sometimes propaganda is about persuading people. And sometimes, I think, it is about
Whitney is another author who declares the "Russians did it" narrative a psyop. He then
devotes entire columns to the psyop, "naww Russia didn't do it". There could be plenty to write about – recent laws that do undercut liberty, but no,
the Washington Post needs fake opposition to its fake news so you have guys like Whitney in
the less-mainstream fake news media.
So Brennan wanted revenge? Well that's simple enough to understand, without being too
stupid. But Whitney's whopper of a lie is what you're supposed to unquestionably believe. The
US has "rival political parties". Did you miss it?
The US is doing nothing more than acting as the British Empire 2.0. WASP culture was born of a Judaizing heresy: Anglo-Saxon Puritanism. That meant that the
WASP Elites of every are pro-Jewish, especially in order to wage war, physical and/or
cultural, against the vast majority of white Christians they rule.
By the early 19th century, The Brit Empire's Elites also had a strong, and growing, dose
of pro-Arabic/pro-Islamic philoSemitism. Most of that group became ardently pro-Sunni, and
most of the pro-Sunni ones eventually coalescing around promotion of the House of Saud, which
means being pro-Wahhabi and permanently desirous of killing or enslaving virtually all Shiite
So, by the time of Victoria's high reign, the Brit WASP Elites were a strange brew of
hardcoree pro-Jewish and hardcore pro-Arabic/islamic. The US foreign policy of today is an
attempt to put those two together and force it on everyone and make it work.
The Brit secret service, in effect, created and trained not merely the CIA but also the
Mossad and Saudi Arabia's General Intelligence Presidency. All four are defined by endless
lies, endless acts of utterly amoral savagery. All 4 are at least as bad as the KGB ever was,
and that means as bad as Hell itself.
Traditional triumphalist American narrative history, as taught in schools up through the
60s or so, portrayed America as "wart-free." Since then, with Zinn's book playing a major
role, it has increasingly been portrayed as "warts-only," which is of course at least equally
flawed. I would say more so.
All I am asking is that American (and other) history be written "warts and all." The
triumphalist version is true, largely, and so is the Zinn version. Gone With the Wind
and Roots both portray certain aspects of the pre-war south fairly accurately..
America has been, and is, both evil and good. As is/was true of every human institution
and government in history. Personally, I believe America, net/net, has been one of the
greatest forces for human good ever. But nobody will realize that if only the negative side
of American history is taught.
"There must be something really dirty in Russigate that hasn't yet come out to generate
this level of panic."
You continue to claim what you cannot prove.
But then you are a Jews First Zionist.
Russia-Gate Jumps the Shark
Russia-gate has jumped the shark with laughable new claims about a tiny number of
"Russia-linked" social media ads, but the US mainstream media is determined to keep a
Most of that group became ardently pro-Sunni, and most of the pro-Sunni ones eventually
coalescing around promotion of the House of Saud, which means being pro-Wahhabi and
permanently desirous of killing or enslaving virtually all Shiite Mohammedans.
Thanks for the laugh. During the 19th century, the Sauds were toothless, dirt-poor hicks
from the deep desert of zero importance on the world stage.
The Brits were not Saudi proponents, in fact promoting the Husseins of Hejaz, the guys
Lawrence of Arabia worked with. The Husseins, the Sharifs of Mecca and rulers of Hejaz, were
the hereditary enemies of the Sauds of Nejd.
After WWI, the Brits installed Husseins as rulers of both Transjordan and Iraq, which with
the Hejaz meant the Sauds were pretty much surrounded. The Sauds conquered the Hejaz in 1924,
despite lukewarm British support for the Hejaz.
Nobody in the world cared much about the Saudis one way or another until massive oil
fields were discovered, by Americans not Brits, starting in 1938. There was no reason they
should. Prior to that Saudi prominence in world affairs was about equal to that of Chad
today, and for much the same reason. Chad (and Saudi Arabia) had nothing anybody else
'Putin stopped talking about the "Lisbon to Vladivostok" free trade area long ago" --
Putin was simply trying to sell Russia's application for EU membership with the
catch-phrase "Lisbon to Vladivostok". He continued that until the issue was triply mooted (1)
by implosion of EU growth and boosterism, (2) by NATO's aggressive stance, in effect taken by
NATO in Ukraine events and in the Baltics, and, (3) Russia's alliance with China.
It is surely still true that Russians think of themselves, categorically, as Europeans.
OTOH, we can easily imagine that Russians in Vladivostok look at things differently than do
Russians in St. Petersburg. Then again, Vladivostok only goes back about a century and a
Anyway, the mission was accomplished and the relations with Russia are worse now than
during Obama administration.
I generally agree with your comment, but that part strikes me as a bit of an exaggeration.
While relations with Russia certainly haven't improved, how have they really worsened? The
second round of sanctions that Trump reluctantly approved have yet to be implemented by
Europe, which was the goal. And apart from that, what of substance has changed?
It's not surprising that 57 percent of the American people believe in Russian meddling.
Didn't two-thirds of the same crowd believe that Saddam was behind 9/11, too? The American
public is being brainwashed 24 hours a day all year long.
The CIA is the world largest criminal and terrorist organization. With Brennan the worst
has come to the worst. The whole Russian meddling affair was initiated by the Obama/Clinton
gang in cooperation with 95 percent of the media. Nothing will come out of it.
This disinformation campaign might be the prelude to an upcoming war.
Right now, the US is run by jerks and idiots. Watch the video.
Only dumb people does not know that TRUMP IS NETANYAHU'S PUPPET.
The fifth column zionist jews are running the albino stooge and foreign policy in the
Middle East to expand Israel's interest against American interest that is TREASON. One of
these FIFTH COLUMNISTS is Jared Kushner. He should be arrested.
[The key figures who had primary influence on both Trump's and Bush's Iran policies held
views close to those of Israel's right-wing Likud Party. The main conduit for the Likudist
line in the Trump White House is Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law, primary foreign
policy advisor, and longtime friend and supporter of Netanyahu. Kushner's parents are also
long-time supporters of Israeli settlements on the occupied West Bank.
Another figure to whom the Trump White House has turned is John Bolton, undersecretary of
state and a key policymaker on Iran in the Bush administration. Although Bolton was not
appointed Trump's secretary of state, as he'd hoped, he suddenly reemerged as a player on
Iran policy thanks to his relationship with Kushner. Politico reports that Bolton met with
Kushner a few days before the final policy statement was released and urged a complete
withdrawal from the deal in favor of his own plan for containing Iran.
Bolton spoke with Trump by phone on Thursday about the paragraph in the deal that vowed it
would be "terminated" if there was any renegotiation, according to Politico. He was calling
Trump from Las Vegas, where he'd been meeting with casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, the third
major figure behind Trump's shift towards Israeli issues. Adelson is a Likud supporter who
has long been a close friend of Netanyahu's and has used his Israeli tabloid newspaper Israel
Hayomto support Netanyahu's campaigns. He was Trump's main campaign contributor in 2016,
donating $100 million. Adelson's real interest has been in supporting Israel's interests in
Washington -- especially with regard to Iran.]
Putin's dream of Greater Europe is the death knell for the unipolar world order. It
means the economic center of the world will shift to Central Asia where abundant resources
and cheap labor of the east will be linked to the technological advances and the Capital
the of the west eliminating the need to trade in dollars or recycle profits into US
debt. The US economy will slip into irreversible decline, and the global hegemon will
steadily lose its grip on power. That's why it is imperative for the US prevail in
Ukraine– a critical land bridge connecting the two continents– and to topple
Assad in Syria in order to control vital resources and pipeline corridors. Washington
must be in a position where it can continue to force its trading partners to denominate
their resources in dollars and recycle the proceeds into US Treasuries if it is to maintain
its global primacy. The main problem is that Russia is blocking Uncle Sam's path to
success which is roiling the political establishment in Washington.
American dominance is very much tied to the dollar's role as the world's reserve currency,
and the rest of the world no longer want to fund this bankrupt, warlike state –
particularly the Chinese.
First, it confirms that the US did not want to see the jihadist extremists
defeated by Russia. These mainly-Sunni militias served as Washington's proxy-army
conducting an ambitious regime change operation which coincided with US strategic
The CIA run US/Israeli/ISIS alliance.
Second, Zakharova confirms that the western media is not an independent news
gathering organization, but a propaganda organ for the foreign policy establishment who
dictates what they can and can't say.
They are given the political line and they broadcast it.
The loosening of rules governing the dissemination of domestic propaganda coupled with
the extraordinary advances in surveillance technology, create the perfect conditions for
the full implementation of an American police state. But what is more concerning, is
that the primary levers of state power are no longer controlled by elected officials but by
factions within the state whose interests do not coincide with those of the American
people. That can only lead to trouble.
At some point Americans are going to get a "War on Domestic Terror" cheered along by the
media. More or less the arrest and incarceration of any opposition following the Soviet
On the plus side, everyone now knows that the Anglo-US media from the NY Times to the
Economist, from WaPo to the Gruniard, and from the BBC to CNN, the CBC and Weinstein's
Hollywood are a worthless bunch of depraved lying bastards.
Such a truthful portrait of reality ! The ruling elite is indeed massively corrupt,
compromised, and controlled by dark forces. And the police state is already here. For most
people, so far, in the form of massive collection of personal data and increasing number of
mandatory regulations. But just one or two big false-flags away from progressing into
something much worse.
The thing is, no matter how thick the mental cages are, and how carefully they are
maintained by the daily massive injections of "certified" truth (via MSM), along with
neutralizing or compromising of "troublemakers", the presence of multiple alternative sources
in the age of Internet makes people to slip out of these cages one by one, and as the last
events show – with acceleration.
It means that there's a fast approaching tipping point after which it'd be impossible for
those in power both to keep a nice "civilized" face and to control the "cage-free"
population. So, no matter how the next war will be called, it will be the war against the
free Internet and free people. That's probably why N. Korean leader has no fear to start
The objective was to push new administration into the corner from which it could not
improve relations with Russia as Trump indicated that he wanted to during the campaign.
Good point. That was probably one of the objectives (and from the point of view of the
deep-state, perhaps the most important objective) of the "Russia hacked our democracy"
narrative, in addition to the general deligitimization of the Trump administration.
And, keep in mind, Washington's Sunni proxies were not a division of the Pentagon; they
were entirely a CIA confection: CIA recruited, CIA-armed, CIA-funded and
Clearly the CIA was making war on Syria. Is secret coercive covert action against sovereign
nations Ok? Is it legal? When was the CIA designated a war making entity – what part of the constitution OK's
that? Isn't the congress obliged by constitutional law to declare war? (These are NOT six
month actions – they go on and on.)
Are committees of six congressman and six senators, who meet in secret, just avoiding the
grave constitutional questions of war? We the People cannot even interrogate these
politicians. (These politicians make big money in the secrecy swamp when they leave
Syria is only one of many nations that the CIA is attacking – how many countries are
we attacking with drones? Where is congress?
Spying is one thing – covert action is another – covert is wrong – it
goes against world order. Every year after 9/11 they say things are worse – give them
more money more power and they will make things safe. That is BS!
9/11 has opened the flood gates to the US government attacking at will, the various
peoples of this Earth. That is NOT our prerogative.
We are being exceptionally arrogant.
Close the CIA – give the spying to the 16 other agencies.