Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)

Neoliberal war on reality

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false" ~ CIA Director William Casey (attributed)

"Empire of illusions": The  triumph of entertainment and fake  news under neoliberalism

News Elite [Dominance] Theory And the Revolt of the Elite Recommended Links Media as a weapon of mass deception Lewis Powell Memo Deception as an art form
Groupthink Disciplined Minds Belief-coercion in high demand cults Fake News scare and US NeoMcCartyism Conspiracy theory label as a subtle form of censorship Discrediting the opponent as favorite tactic of neoliberals
Neoliberal newspeak US and British media are servants of security apparatus British elite hypocrisy Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak Anti Trump Hysteria Pathological Russophobia of the US elite
Corruption of the language Doublespeak Patterns of Propaganda Diplomacy by deception War propaganda Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle
Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair Patterns of Propaganda Bullshit as MSM communication method Manipulation of the term "freedom of press" Identity politics as divide and conquer The Guardian Slips Beyond the Reach of Embarrassment
Color revolutions Co-opting of the Human Rights to embarrass governments who oppose neoliberalism Democracy as a universal opener for access to natural resources What's the Matter with Kansas Understanding Mayberry Machiavellians  
Neo-fascism Nation under attack meme Nineteen Eighty-Four Manufactured consent Groupthink Big Uncle is Watching You
Who Shot down Malaysian flight MH17? Ukraine: From EuroMaidan to EuroAnschluss Pussy Riot Provocation and "Deranged Pussy Worship Syndrome" MSM Sochi Bashing Rampage Is national security state in the USA gone rogue ? Totalitarian Decisionism & Human Rights: The Re-emergence of Nazi Law
Soft propaganda Classic Papers Media Ownership Propaganda Quotes Humor Etc

"The truth is that the newspaper is not a place for information to be given, rather it is just hollow content, or more than that, a provoker of content. If it prints lies about atrocities, real atrocities are the result."

Karl Kraus, 1914

WAR IS PEACE. FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

1984

We are the world, we are exceptional, we cannot fail. The elite will lie, and the people will pretend to believe them. Heck about 20 percent of the American public will believe almost anything if it is wrapped with the right prejudice and appeal to passion. Have a pleasant evening.

jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com, Feb 04, 2015


Introduction

In many respects, the media creates reality, so perhaps the most effective route toward changing reality runs through the media.  "Controlling the narrative" is the major form of neoliberal MSM war on reality. By providing "prepackaged" narrative for a particular world event and selectively suppressing alternative information channels that contraduct the official narrative, neoliberals control and channel emotions of people in the direction they want.  Often in the direction of yet another war for the expansion of the global neoliberal empire led from Washington, DC.

libezkova said in reply to Fred C. Dobbs...  January 29, 2017 at 08:31 AM  

Neoliberal MSM want to control the narrative. That's why "alternative facts" should be called an "alternative narrative". https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/09/controlling-the-narrative/?_r=0

== quote ==

Maybe this is the same kind of clinical detachment doctors have to cultivate, a way of distancing oneself from the subject, protecting yourself against a crippling empathy. I won’t say that writers or artists are more sensitive than other people, but it may be that they’re less able to handle their own emotions.

It may be that art, like drugs, is a way of dulling or controlling pain. Eloquently articulating a feeling is one way to avoid actually experiencing it.

Words are only symbols, noises or marks on paper, and turning the messy, ugly stuff of life into language renders it inert and manageable for the author, even as it intensifies it for the reader.

It’s a nerdy, sensitive kid’s way of turning suffering into something safely abstract, an object of contemplation.

I suspect most of the people who write all that furious invective on the Internet, professional polemicists and semiliterate commenters alike, are lashing out because they’ve been hurt — their sense of fairness or decency has been outraged, or they feel personally wounded or threatened.

It is hard to disagree with the notion which was put by several authors that American society is living  in a cocoon of illusion which conveniently isolates them from reality: entertainment and escapism infuse our society, economy, and political system with severe consequences. Among such authors are  Aldous Huxley. C. Wright Mills, Sheldon Wolin, Ralph Nader, Karl Polanyi, Jared Diamond, Paul Craig Roberts, Chris Hedge and several others. If we compare dystopias of Huxley and Orwell, and it clear that Huxley in his famous  New Brave World predicted the future much better:

"Huxley feared was that would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one... the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance."

The central idea here is that we now live as a society in which citizens become so distracted (and by extension detached) from reality that they lost any ability to influence their political or economic destiny. It is the same phenomenon that is described under the label of Inverted Totalitarism

This is one of the truly malevolent aspects of today's modern neoliberal world order and we need to confront it. It allows the old game of blaming the weak and the marginal, a staple of neo-fascist and despotic regimes; this illusion empower the dark undercurrents of sadism and violence in American society and deflect attention from the neoliberal financial vampires who have drained the blood of the country

"The tragedy is that we have become a screen culture, televisions, computers, phones, tablets, etc. Our electronic hallucinations have produced a society that has little time or patience for introspection or deep thinking. It reinforced my decision to maintain a television free life. For some, what Chris has to say may cut to close to the bone. But those with the courage to do so are usually the ones that care the most."

The biggest and most invisible elephant in the American psyche is this: our government has long since abandoned the goal of managing this nation as a nation. Instead, America as a nation is managed as a means to global empire.

For example the loss of the critical skills of literacy (seven million total illiterates, another 27 million unable to read well enough to complete a job application, and still another 50 million who read at a 4th-5th-grade level)  have led large part of the US population to become incapable of thinking for ourselves.

In fact they have become as malleable as children. 80% of U.S. families did not buy or read a single book in a year.  Despite technology and internet access we are becoming a society of functionally ignorant and illiterate people.

For example there is widespread illusion of inclusion. This is the illusion that we are or will be included among the fortunate few because misfortune happens only to those who deserve it. There are plenty of people who understand that the corporate model is one in which there are squeezers and those who are to be squeezed. So the illusion of inclusion provides what can be called "a plantation morality" that exalts the insiders and denigrates the outsiders. Those content with this arrangement obviously view themselves as insiders even when they work for companies that are actively shedding employees. Many of these people are happy to be making good money for digging graves for others, never stopping to wonder if maybe someday one of those graves might be their own.

One of the first recorded metaphors which explained this phenomenon of substitution of reality with  illusion was Plato's tale about cave dwellers, who thought the shadows on the wall were the actual reality. Illusion can also serve as a deliberate distraction, isolation layer that protects form unpleasant reality. The point is that now it is illusions that dominate American life; both for those that succumb to them, and for those that promote and sustains them. It is the use of illusions in the US  society that become  prevalent today, converting like into the cinema or theater, where primary goal is entertainment.

Modern MSM are driven by postmodernism which includes among other things substitution of reality with artificial reality, fragmentation of history and push for historical amnesia, decentering of subject and juxtaposition of opposites. But the key feature is controlling the narrative.

Controlling the narrative means control and deliberate selection of the issues which can be discussed

The Journalist Udo Ulfkotte ashamed today that he spent 17 years in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. ...he reveals why opinion leaders produce tendentious reports and serve as the extended Arm of the NATO press office. ...the author also was admitted into the networks of American elite organizations, received in return for positive coverage in the US even a certificate of honorary citizenship.

In this book you will learn about industry lobby organisations. The author calls hundreds of names and looks behind the Scenes of those organizations, which exert bias into media, such as: Atlantic bridge, Trilateral Commission, the German Marshall Fund, American Council on Germany, American Academy, Aspen Institute, and the Institute for European politics. Also revealed are the intelligence backgrounds of those lobby groups, the methods and forms of propaganda and financing used, for example, by the US Embassy. Which funds  projects for the targeted influencing of public opinion in Germany 

...You realize how you are being manipulated - and you know from whom and why. At the end it becomes clear that diversity of opinion will now only be simulated. Because our "messages" are often pure brainwashing.

Gekaufte Journalisten - Medienwelt Enthüllungen Bücher - Kopp Verlag

Controlling the narrative means control and deliberate selection of the issues which can be discussed (and by extension which are not)  in MSM. It represents real war on reality.  Non-stop, 24 by 7 character of modern media help with this greatly (The Unending Anxiety of an ICYMI World - NYTimes.com):

We used to receive media cyclically. Newspapers were published once (or sometimes twice) a day, magazines weekly or monthly. Nightly news was broadcast, well, each night. Television programs were broadcast on one of the major networks one night a week at a specific time, never to return until a rerun or syndication. Movies were shown first in theaters and on video much later (or, before the advent of VCRs, not until a revival). There were not many interstices, just discrete units — and a smaller number of them.

Now we’re in the midst of the streaming era, when the news industry distributes material on a 24-hour cycle, entire seasons of TV shows are dumped on viewers instantaneously, most movies are available at any time and the flow of the Internet and social media is ceaseless. We are nearly all interstitial space, with comparatively few singularities.

Media became out windows to the world and this window is broken. The notion of 'controlling the narrative' points to dirty games played by PR gurus and spin merchants with event coverage (especially foreign event coverage) to ensure the rule of elite.  A good part of the White House budget and resources is spent on controlling the narrative. Creation of the narrative and "talking points" for MSM is the task of State Department. With State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki, as a pretty telling "incarnation"  of the trend. 

And MSM are doing an exemplary job controlling the political narrative. This way they demonstrate their faithful service to the state and the ruling political class. Nowhere is more evident then in coverage of wars.

Only social media can smash the official version of events. And in some case that has happened. The USA MSM honchos are now scratching heads trying to understand  how to control their version of events despite Twitter, Facebook and other social networks.

On Ukraine, despite the most coordinated propaganda offensive of Western MSMs, the Western elite failed to fully control the narrative:  a sizable number of Europeans are still clinging to the notion that this story had two sides. You can see this trend from analysis of Guardian comments (The Guardian Presstitutes Slip Beyond the Reach of Embarrassment ). More importantly the EU political establishment has failed to maintain a central lie inside official narrative -- that the EU is benign and a force for good / peace / prosperity. EU elite has shown its ugly face supporting Ukrainian far right.

Another example were initially MSM totally controlled the narrative (the first two-three weeks) and then when the narrative start slipping away they need to silence the subject  Shooting down Malaysian flight MH17

The thing is, once you've lost control of the narrative, as happened with coverage MH17 tragedy, there's no way back. Once Western MSM lost it, no-one any longer believed  a word they said about the tragedy.

And little can be done to win back that credibility on the particular subject. Moreover, due to this Europeans are becoming more and more receptive of a drip of alternative media stories that completely destroy official EU narrative. They came from a multitude of little sources, including this site and they collectively  cements the loss of trust to the EU elite. 

More subtle nuances of controlling the narrative: the role of the scapegoat

 There also more subtle nuances of controlling the narrative. Actually controlling the narrative does not mean that you need to suppress all the negative news (like propagandists in the USSR often did -- leading to complete discreditation of official propaganda in minds of the USSR people -- it simply became the subject of jokes). As John V. Walsh noted:

There is a simple rule that is followed scrupulously by U.S. commentators of every stripe on world affairs and war – with a very few notable exceptions, Paul Craig Roberts and Pepe Escobar among them.

This rule allows strong criticism of the U.S. But major official adversaries of the U.S., Iran, Russia and China, must never, ever be presented as better than the US in any significant way. The US may be depicted as equally bad (or better) than these enemies, but never worse.

In other words, any strong criticism of the US presuppose scapegoating and vicious propaganda campaign against  major official adversaries of the US such as Russia. It  must never, ever be presented in a better light then the US in any significant way. In selected cases, the US may be depicted as equally bad, but never worse.

The most recent incarnation of this rule was during Hillary Clinton campaign for POTUS in 2016.

Chris Hedge book Empire of Illusion

 
The informational function of the media would be this to help us forget, to serve as the very agents and mechanism for our historical amnesia.

But in that cast of two features of postmodernism on which I have dwelt here -- the transformation of reality into images, the fragmentation of 'me' into a series of perpetual presents -- are bother extraordinary consolant with this process.

... We have seen that there is a way in which postmodernism replicates or reproduces -- reinforces -- the logic of consumer capitalism.

Frederic Jameson “Postmodernism and Consumer Society

 

Chis Hedge Empire of Illusion  is a penetrating analysis of this effort of "entertainment society" and converting everything including politics into entertainment. It was published in 2010. Hedges discuss  complex issues and a clear, succinct way. You might agree with him, you might disagree with him but you will enjoy his brilliant prose. 

Those who manipulate  from the shadows our lives are the agents, publicists, marketing departments, promoters, script writers, television and movie producers, advertisers, video technicians, photographers, bodyguards, wardrobe consultants, fitness trainers, pollsters, public announcers, and television news personalities who create the vast stage for the Empire of Illusion. They are the puppet masters. No one achieves celebrity status, without the approval of cultural enablers and intermediaries. The sole object is to hold attention and satisfy an audience. These techniques of theater leeched into politics, religion, education, literature, news, commerce, warfare, and even crime. It converts that society into wrestling ring mesh with the ongoing dramas on television, in movies, and in the news, where "real-life" stories, especially those involving celebrities, allow news reports to become mini-dramas complete with a star, a villain, a supporting cast, a good-looking host, and a neat, if often unexpected, conclusion (p. 15-16).

The first big achievement of Empire of Illusion was "glorification of war" after WWIII. As the veterans of WW II saw with great surprise their bitter, brutal wartime experience were skillfully transformed into an illusion, the mythic narrative of heroism and patriotic glory sold to the public by the Pentagon's public relations machine and Hollywood. The extreme brutality and meaninglessness of war could not compete against the power of the illusion, the fantasy of war as a ticket to glory, honor, and manhood. It was what the government and the military wanted to promote. It worked because it had the power to simulate experience for most viewers who were never at Iwo Jima or in a war. Few people understood that this illusion was a lie. p. 21-22.

Media evolved into branch of entertainment. He gives great insight on American society. Several chapters should be a required read for all sociology, film, journalism students, or government leaders. Much like Paul Craig Robert's How America Was Lost you might feel unplugged from the matrix after reading this book. This is the book that corporate America, as well as the neoliberal elite, do not want you to read. It's a scathing indictment against everything that's wrong with the system and those that continue to perpetuate the lie in the name of the almighty dollar. In a way the USA as the rest of the world are amusing itself into a post apocalyptic state, without an apocalypse. It is simply cannibalizing itself.

That books also contains succinct, and damning condemnation of globalization (and, specifically, the USA's role in it). You can compare it with Klein's 'Shock Doctrine', but it cuts a wider swath. 

The discussion the follows was by-and-large adapted from  D. Benor  Amazon review of the book

We consume countless lies daily, false promises that if we buy this brand or that product, if we vote for this candidate, we will be respected, envied, powerful, loved, and protected. The flamboyant lives of celebrities and the outrageous characters on television, movies,  and sensational talk shows are peddled to us, promising to fill up the emptiness in our own lives. Celebrity culture encourages everyone to think of themselves as potential celebrities, as possession unique if unacknowledged gifts. p. 26-7. Celebrity is the vehicle used by a corporate society to sell us these branded commodities, most of which we do not need. Celebrities humanize commercial commodities. They present the familiar and comforting face of the corporate state. p. 37.

Reporters, especially those on television, no longer ask whether the message is true but rather whether the pseudo-event worked or did not work as political theater for supporting particular (usually State Department in case of foreign events) talking points.  Pseudo-events are judged on how effectively we have been manipulated by illusion. Those events that appear real are relished and lauded. Those that fail to create a believable illusion are deemed failures. Truth is irrelevant. Those who succeed in politics, as in most of the culture, are those who create the most convincing fantasies. This is the real danger of pseudo-events and why pseudo-events are far more pernicious than stereotypes. They do not explain reality, as stereotypes attempt to, but replace reality. Pseudo-events redefines reality by the parameters set by their creators. These creators, who make massive profits selling illusions, have a vested interest in maintaining the power structures they control. p. 50-1.

A couple quotes: "When a nation becomes unmoored from reality, it retreats into a world of magic. Facts are accepted or discarded according to the dictates of a preordained cosmology. The search for truth becomes irrelevant." (p. 50) "The specialized dialect and narrow education of doctors, academics, economists, social scientists, military officers, investment bankers, and government bureaucrats keeps each sector locked in its narrow role. The overarching structure of the corporate state and the idea of the common good are irrelevant to specialists. They exist to make the system work, not to examine it." (p. 98) I could go on and on citing terrific passages.

The flight into illusion sweeps away the core values of the open society. It corrodes the ability to think for oneself, to draw independent conclusions, to express dissent when judgment and common sense tell you something is wrong, to be self-critical, to challenge authority, to grasp historical facts, to advocate for change, and to acknowledge that there are other views, different ways, and structures of being that are morally and socially acceptable. A populace deprived of the ability to separate lies from truth, that has become hostage to the fictional semblance of reality put forth by pseudo-events, is no longer capable of sustaining a free society.

Those who slip into this illusion ignore the signs of impending disaster. The physical degradation of the planet, the cruelty of global capitalism, the looming oil crisis, the collapse of financial markets, and the danger of overpopulation rarely impinge to prick the illusions that warp our consciousness. The words, images, stories, and phrases used to describe the world in pseudo-events have no relation to what is happening around us. The advances of technology and science, rather than obliterating the world of myth, have enhanced its power to deceive. We live in imaginary, virtual worlds created by corporations that profit from our deception. Products and experiences - indeed, experience as a product - offered up for sale, sanctified by celebrities, are mirages. They promise us a new personality. They promise us success and fame. They promise to mend our brokenness. p. 52-3.

We have all seen the growth of a culture of lies and deception in politics, banking, commerce and education. Hodges points out how this has been facilitated by our abandoning the teaching of values and analysis in our schools.

The flight from the humanities has become a flight from conscience. It has created an elite class of experts who seldom look beyond their tasks and disciplines to put what they do in a wider, social context. And by absenting themselves from the moral and social questions raised by the humanities, they have opted to serve a corporate structure that has destroyed the culture around them.

Our elites - the ones in Congress, the ones on Wall Street, and the ones being produced at prestigious universities and business schools - do not have the capacity to fix our financial mess. Indeed, they will make it worse. They have no concept, thanks to the educations they have received, of how to replace a failed system with a new one. They are petty, timid, and uncreative bureaucrats superbly trained to carry our systems management. They see only piecemeal solutions that will satisfy the corporate structure. Their entire focus is numbers, profits, and personal advancement. They lack a moral and intellectual core. They are as able to deny gravely ill people medical coverage to increase company profits as they are to use taxpayer dollars to peddle costly weapons systems to blood-soaked dictatorships. The human consequences never figure into their balance sheets. The democratic system, they believe, is a secondary product of the free market - which they slavishly serve. p. 111.

I quote Hodges at some length because of his cogent, clear summaries of the problems leading us to self-destruction and to ways we might someday restructure society to be supportive and healing to the individual - rather than exploiting people and viewing them only as valuable as they can be manipulated into being gullible consumers.

This is one of the clearest and best focused discussions I have seen on the problems of modern society that are leading us to societal suicide

Hedges points out how a cycle sustains itself between elite educational institutions (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc.), the Government (think Congress in particular) and Corporations. Ivy league schools basically turn-out lackeys that do whatever is necessary to maintain their elite, self-absorbed status. The last chapter is entitled, "The Illusion of America," and this is where Hedges does a fantastic job of pulling together all the elements of this dysfunctional society. Other books touch the same themes, sometimes more forcefully but in this book most important elements of this picture put together.

Among the booksHedges cites:

Gekaufte Journalisten by Udo Ulfkotte

The book Gekaufte Journalisten by Udo Ulfkotte was a revelation. Of cause, we suspected many things he  described, but nwo we know detailed methods and mechanisms of suppressing alterative opinion in German society, methods that are probably more effective that anything propagandists in the DDR adn the USSR ever attempted.  One of the central concept here is the concept of "Noble Lie".

Guardian became neoliberal as soon as Tony Blaire became Prime minister. As any neoliberal publication is subscribes to the notion of "noble lie". The latter actually came from neocons playbook.   No they knowingly try to dumb down their reader substituting important topic with celebrity gossip and hate speech. Even political issue now are "served" to the public as dishes under heavy sauce of personalities involved, which is a perfect way to obscure the subject and distract the readers.

geronimo -> MurkyFogsFutureLogs 14 Mar 2015 12:31
Indeed...

Under the retiring editor, all politics seems to have been reduced to 'identity' politics. Forget about class, war, class war and so on... If it can't be reduced to Hillary's gender or Putin's, er... transcendental evil... then it's barely worth a comment above the line.

As I've said before, for the Guardian 'the personal is the political' - or rather, for the Guardian as for Hillary, the political reduces to the personal.

A marriage made, not so much in heaven, but somewhere in political-fashionista North London.

In reality most prominent journalists are on tight leash of "'deep state". As Udo Ulfkotte book attests this is a rule, not an exception. While this was known since Operation Mockingbird  was revealed, nothing changed. As revealed by Senator Frank Church investigations (Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities) in 1975. In his Congress report published in 1976 the authors stated:

"The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda. These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets."

According to the "Family Jewels" report, released by the National Security Archive on June 26, 2007, during the period from March 12, 1963, and June 15, 1963, the CIA installed telephone taps on two Washington-based news reporters. Church argued that misinforming the world cost American taxpayers an estimated $265 million a year.[20]

In February 1976, George H. W. Bush, the recently appointed Director of the CIA, announced a new policy:

"Effective immediately, the CIA will not enter into any paid or contract relationship with any full-time or part-time news correspondent accredited by any U.S. news service, newspaper, periodical, radio or television network or station." He added that the CIA would continue to "welcome" the voluntary, unpaid cooperation of journalists.[21]

But at this point only handlers and methods changed, not the policy. They are still all controlled by deep state. The most recent revelations of this fact were published by Udo Ulfkotte’s in his bestseller book  Bought Journalists. Here is one Amazon review of the book: 

Unicorns & Kittenson May 1, 2015

I've managed to read a bit of the German version ...
 
I've managed to read a bit of the German version and now I think I understand why this is still not available in English although it was supposed to be released in this and other languages seven months ago. I will be very surprised if this shocking and destabilizing book (which names names) is made available to Americans ... even though it's primarily about the abusive tactics of American intelligence agencies. Please keep asking why it isn't published - despite being a best-seller in Germany -- and how we can get it here on Kindle.

As one Amazon reviewer said "This book will change for ever the way you read and watch the mainstream media! " Here is some additional information from russia-insider:

... ... ...

Ironically, however, it’s likely that one of the biggest threats (especially in Europe) to Anglo-American media credibility about Ukraine and other issues is coming from a very old-fashioned medium – a book.

Udo Ulfkotte’s bestseller Bought Journalists has been a sensation in Germany since its publication last autumn. The journalist and former editor of one of Germany’s largest newspapers, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, revealed that he was for years secretly on the payroll of the CIA and was spinning the news to favour U.S. interests. Moreover he alleges that some major media are nothing more than propaganda outlets for international think-tanks, intelligence agencies, and corporate high-finance.

“We’re talking about puppets on a string,” he says, “journalists who write or say whatever their masters tell them to say or write. If you see how the mainstream media is reporting about the Ukraine conflict and if you know what’s really going on, you get the picture. The masters in the background are pushing for war with Russia and western journalists are putting on their helmets.” [8]

In another interview, Ulfkotte said:

“The German and American media tries to bring war to the people in Europe, to bring war to Russia. This is a point of no return, and I am going to stand up and say…it is not right what I have done in the past, to manipulate people, to make propaganda against Russia, and it is not right what my colleagues do, and have done in the past, because they are bribed to betray the people not only in Germany, all over Europe.” [9]

... ... ...

Apparently, Pomeranzev has forgotten that important October 2004 article by Ron Suskind published in the New York Times Magazine during the second war in Iraq (which, like the first, was based on a widely disseminated lie). Suskind quoted one of George W. Bush’s aides (probably Karl Rove): “The aide said that guys like me [journalists, writers, historians] were ‘in what we call the reality-based community,’ which he defined as people who ‘believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality…That’s not the way the world really works anymore,’ he continued. ‘We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we’ll act again, creating other new realities which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do’.” [12]

It’s a rather succinct description of Orwellian spin and secrecy in a media-saturated Empire, where discerning the truth becomes ever more difficult.

That is why people believe someone like Udo Ulfkotte, who is physically ill, says he has only a few years left to live, and told an interviewer,

 “I am very fearful of a new war in Europe, and I don’t like to have this situation again, because war is never coming from itself, there is always people who push for war, and this is not only politicians, it is journalists too… We have betrayed our readers, just to push for war…I don’t want this anymore, I’m fed up with this propaganda. We live in a banana republic and not in a democratic country where we have press freedom…” [13]

Recently, as Mike Whitney has pointed out in CounterPunch (March 10), Germany’s newsmagazine Der Spiegel dared to challenge the fabrications of NATO’s top commander in Europe, General Philip Breedlove, for spreading “dangerous propaganda” that is misleading the public about Russian “troop advances” and making “flat-out inaccurate statements” about Russian aggression.

Whitney asks, “Why this sudden willingness to share the truth? It’s because they no longer support Washington’s policy, that’s why. No one in Europe wants the US to arm and train the Ukrainian army. No wants them to deploy 600 paratroopers to Kiev and increase U.S. logistical support. No one wants further escalation, because no wants a war with Russia. It’s that simple.” [14] Whitney argued that “the real purpose of the Spiegel piece is to warn Washington that EU leaders will not support a policy of military confrontation with Moscow.”

So now we know the reason for the timing of the April 15 U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, “Confronting Russia’s Weaponization of Information.” Literally while U.S. paratroopers were en route to Kiev, the hawks in Washington (and London) knew it was time to crank up the rhetoric. The three witnesses were most eager to oblige.


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Jun 17, 2018] Mattis Putin Is Trying To Undermine America s Moral Authority by Caitlin Johnstone

Highly recommended!
The current anti-Russian hysteria is the attempt to unite the society which become hostile to neoliberal elite.
Notable quotes:
"... A casual glance at facts and history makes it instantly clear that the United States has no "moral authority" of any kind whatsoever, and is arguably the hub of the most pernicious and dangerous force ever assembled in human history. But the establishment Russia narrative really is that cartoonishly ridiculous: you really do have to believe that the US government is 100 percent pure good and the Russian government is 100 percent pure evil to prevent the whole narrative from falling to pieces. ..."
"... In reality, Russia is nothing other than a rival power structure that the US-centralized empire wants to either collapse or absorb, but they can't just come right out and tell the public that they're dangerously escalating tensions with a nuclear superpower because westerners live in an invisible empire ruled by insatiably greedy plutocrats, so they make up nonsense about Putin being some kind of omnipotent supervillain who has infiltrated the highest levels of US government and is trying to take over the world. ..."
"... All this new cold war hysteria and nuclear brinkmanship has basically been America acting like a bitchy high school drama queen because Russia is saying mean things about it behind its back? How does a guy named "Mad Dog" get to be such a thin-skinned little snowflake? ..."
"... As we've been discussing a lot recently, control of the narrative is absolutely essential for rulers to maintain their rule. When you hear establishment policy makers babbling about "Russian propaganda" and Putin's attempts to "undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals," all that they are saying is that the plutocrats who rule America need to be able to control the way Americans think and vote, and that the Russian government is making it a bit harder for them to do that. ..."
"... It seems to be that every criticism leveled at Russia, and China even, is a simple reflection of what the USA is doing. Deflection. Classic 'pot calling the kettle black' stuff. ..."
"... You're paying more respect to it than it deserves by giving it a clinical diagnosis, implying "projection" as a psychological defense. Let's call it by its simple name: dirty rotten lying, propaganda, trickery. It's not like the assholes don't know they are lying – of course they do! And they know we know it, too, and don't care. ..."
Jun 17, 2018 | caitlinjohnstone.com

At a graduation ceremony for the US Naval War College (barf), US Secretary of Defense James Mattis asserted that Russian President Vladimir Putin "aims to diminish the appeal of the western democratic model and attempts to undermine America's moral authority," and that "his actions are designed not to challenge our arms at this point but to undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals."

This would be the same James Mattis who's been overseeing the war crime s committed by America's armed forces during their illegal occupation of Syria. This would be the same United States of America that was born of the genocide of indigenous tribes and the labor of African slaves, which slaughtered millions in Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Iraq, Libya and Syria for no legitimate reason, which is partnered with Ukrainian Nazis , jihadist factions in Syria and Iranian terror cultists , which supports 73 percent of the world's dictators , which interferes constantly in the electoral processes of other countries as a matter of policy, which stages coups around the world , which has encircled the globe with military bases , whose FBI still targets black civil rights activists for persecution to this very day , which routinely enters into undeclared wars of aggression against noncompliant governments to advance plutocratic interests , which remains the only country ever to use nuclear weapons on human beings after doing so completely needlessly in Japan, and which is functionally a corporatist oligarchy with no meaningful "democratic model" in place at all .

https://www.youtube.com/embed/8JdurtVYp2E

A casual glance at facts and history makes it instantly clear that the United States has no "moral authority" of any kind whatsoever, and is arguably the hub of the most pernicious and dangerous force ever assembled in human history. But the establishment Russia narrative really is that cartoonishly ridiculous: you really do have to believe that the US government is 100 percent pure good and the Russian government is 100 percent pure evil to prevent the whole narrative from falling to pieces. If you accept the idea that the exchange is anything close to 50/50, with Russia giving back more or less what it's getting and simply protecting its own interests from the interests of geopolitical rivals, it no longer makes any sense to view Putin as a leader who poses a unique threat to the world. If you accept the idea that the west is actually being far more aggressive and antagonistic toward Russia than Russia is being toward the west, it gets even more laughable.

In order to believe that the US has anything resembling "moral authority" you have to shove your head so far into the sand you get lava burns, but that really is what is needed to keep western anti-Russia hysteria going. None of the things the Russian government has been accused of doing (let alone the very legitimate questions about whether or not they even did all of them) merit anything but an indifferent shrug when compared with the unforgivable evils that America's unelected power establishment has been inflicting upon the world, so they need to weave a narrative about "moral authority" in order to give those accusations meaning and relevance. And, since the notion of America having moral authority is contradicted by all facts in evidence, that narrative is necessarily woven of threads of fantasy and denial.

Establishment anti-Russia hysteria is all narrative, no substance. It's sustained by the talking heads of plutocrat-owned western media making the same unanimous assertions over and over again in authoritative, confident-sounding tones of voice without presenting any evidence or engaging with the reality of what Russia or its rivals are actually doing. The only reason American liberals believe that Putin is a dangerous boogieman who has taken over their government, but don't believe for example that America is ruled by a baby-eating pedophile cabal, is because the Jake Tappers and Rachel Maddows have told them to believe one conspiracy theory and not the other. They could have employed the exact same strategy with any other wholly unsubstantiated conspiracy narrative and had just as much success.

In reality, Russia is nothing other than a rival power structure that the US-centralized empire wants to either collapse or absorb, but they can't just come right out and tell the public that they're dangerously escalating tensions with a nuclear superpower because westerners live in an invisible empire ruled by insatiably greedy plutocrats, so they make up nonsense about Putin being some kind of omnipotent supervillain who has infiltrated the highest levels of US government and is trying to take over the world.

Of equal interest to the Defense Secretary's "moral authority" gibberish is his claim that Putin's actions "are designed not to challenge our arms at this point but to undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals."

I mean, like what? So Russia isn't challenging America militarily and isn't taking any actions to attempt to, but it's trying to, what, hurt America's feelings? All this new cold war hysteria and nuclear brinkmanship has basically been America acting like a bitchy high school drama queen because Russia is saying mean things about it behind its back? How does a guy named "Mad Dog" get to be such a thin-skinned little snowflake?

I'm just playing. Actually, when Mattis says that the Russian government is trying to "undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals," he is saying that Moscow is interrupting the lies that Americans are being told about their government by the plutocrat-owned media. As we've been discussing a lot recently, control of the narrative is absolutely essential for rulers to maintain their rule. When you hear establishment policy makers babbling about "Russian propaganda" and Putin's attempts to "undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals," all that they are saying is that the plutocrats who rule America need to be able to control the way Americans think and vote, and that the Russian government is making it a bit harder for them to do that.

More and more, the threads of the establishment narrative are ceasing to be unconsciously absorbed and are being increasingly consciously examined instead. This development has ultimately nothing to do with Russia and everything to do with our species moving out of its old relationship with mental narrative as it approaches evolve-or-die time in our challenging new world. I am greatly encouraged by what I am seeing.

* * *

Internet censorship is getting pretty bad, so best way to keep seeing the stuff I publish is to get on the mailing list for my website , so you'll get an email notification for everything I publish. My articles and podcasts are entirely reader and listener-funded, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , checking out my podcast , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , or buying my book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .


Harry S Nydick / June 17, 2018

This is so right on that it is scary. The only problem, while more are questioning, is the fact that the majority of Americans actually believe the bullshit that people like Mattis says. And, with a nickname like Mad Dog, it's a wonder that he hasn't been put down yet.

Even today I had to deal with a typical American – 'swallow-it-hook-line-and-sinker' – idiot.

"The stock market is honest and above board.' 'All immigrants don't belong here.' 'It's fine if the government violates your civil rights' 'Oh and immigrants don't have any.'

I could go on, but I learned long ago to say my piece and move on. For some people, there is no changing their minds, nor even opening them up to considering the truth. There are the descendants of those who were protested against in the 1960s. The 'My country right or wrong' people. Most likely they never had the balls, as children, to speak back to their parents, when those adults were in the wrong. I always wondered whether intellectual blindness is a learned trait. I'm pretty sure that it must be.

William / June 17, 2018
Much or most of what you write about the American narrative is true. However, you weave it into a narrative that ignores central historical facts and themes. Examples; Russia's behavior in Poland after WW2, the Hungarian revolution, the Check invasion and oppression, the take over of Manchuria in the last weeks of WW2.

Stalin killing 20-40 million of his own people, Chechnya, the Korean war, the Berlin wall. Not to mention recent assassinations of its own citizens. Yes, America has done cruel and horrific things in many countries, but it pales to what the Russians have done throughout the ages. It would be akin to comparing what the Nazis did to what the French underground did in response. Both killed, both did things that were horrific, but the French did it in response and not nearly in the same magnitude. Historical contrast is very important when viewing these issues. It is very easy to criticize one's own country but balance is called for. Was Russia justified in taking Crimea, perhaps, but then was Hitler justified in taking the Sudetenland?

JRGJRG / June 17, 2018
What Lee Yates just did there is a beautiful example of Advantageous Comparison defense in Bandera's Moral Disengagement Theory. Yes, the US is morally bankrupt, but so what? The Soviets or Hitler or somebody else was worse. Sorry, that is bullshit.

What did the US overthrow of Mossadegh in Iran have to do with the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia? Nothing. And he brings up Russian Crimea, which voted 95% to rejoin Russia, an example of democracy in action.

william / June 17, 2018
The so what is this: when dealing with monsters one has to stoop as low to defend against it. What happened in Iran was Brittain's provocation. They approached Eisenhower once previously and he refused to intervene. It was only after they convinced him that it was a Russian plot to take over the oil fields that he relented. So yes it was wrong and even monstrous but put in the historical perspective at the time, it made sense. At that time, France was in danger of collapsing and with it the rest of Europe. I am of Middle Eastern ethnicity so I too am sensitive to Western colonialization of the region. However, things are not always as simple as we would like them to be.
I really enjoy when people lower themselves to using vulgarities because they disagree with a point of view-most flattering and intelligent.
JRGJRG / June 17, 2018
Just more evasive moral disengagement. So the Dulles boys finally duped Ike into giving the green light to the overthrow of democratically elected Mossadegh installing a bloodthirsty tyrant that ended up destabilizing the Middle East for the next 50years and running, based on the pretext of Russia hysteria.

Was it true the Russians were really going to take over the oilfields? I never heard that story before. I doubt it very much. History teaches a different lesson. Mossadegh had the temerity to want to share oil profits with the Iranian people who owned it. Thats too much democracy for any country.

Just like Truman was tricked into Korea. Or Johnson was duped into Vietnam.

And so how do you explain why the CIA overthrew Arbenz in Guatemala beginning a reign of terror with genocude lasting 50 years against unarmed peasant villages? East Timor? Chile? Brazil and Argentina? Greece? Angola?

This is just more Advantageous Comparison to justify moral bankruptcy. Sorry, sometimes things are as simple as they look.

No I respectfully disagree. If these seem like difficult moral choices to you, I pity you.

JRGJRG / June 17, 2018
Although I must apologize for not recognizing your rank as a cut above the usual G-7 troll with your knowledge of the advanced techniques of argument for moral disengagement, defending your country against the indefensible. Tough job that calls for an expert.

You must be one of those G-12 trolls called to fill in for overtime duty on fathers day. I'm sorry your wife and kids are going to be missing you today. You can make it up to them tomorrow.

William / June 18, 2018
Funny thing, I agree that the overthrow was wrong, and horrible. I also think it was wrong and perhaps criminal when we invaded both Iraq and Afghanistan. Many of my relatives were killed by tyrants in the Middle East and much of what has happened there is ugly. But again, I do not stoop to personal disparagement. It has no place in honest debate. Same tactic used by the deplorable . Trump and McCarthy for that matter, and of course, now you. As for Mossadegh, he was truly a statesman. England owned the oil fields and he went to the UN to mediate the purchase of the oil fields at market value. The English refused and tried to convince Eisenhower that it was a Russian plot. He tried again and finally Eisenhower relented, wrongly I might add. But do remember, that Eisenhower also stopped the English and French when they wanted to invade Egypt to take over the Suez.
Lee Yates / June 17, 2018
Thank You, JRGJRG. I did not know that I knew that much philosophy. What I said was more in light of current events circa the 1990s. Our "bankers" went to Russia and "helped" them get capitalism. Well they got it, and now their gangsters/bankers are just as wealthy and sophisticated as ours, or more so. Politically, I cannot really blame Putin for holding a grudge about our meddling in Russia and general promotion of Boris Yeltsin. Still I doubt that he would make it easy for us to install another Yeltsin or buy all of Russia's resources either, so why would we make it easy for him to meddle in our country, or do what we do overseas?
jrgjrg / June 17, 2018
This is what you're doing, even if you don't recognize it. If you understand this you will begin to understand the errors of your own ways. This is how totalitarianship develops. Read and learn.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_disengagement

Harry S Nydick / June 17, 2018
Take off the blinders and fully explain how the U.S. genocide of native Americans – and the ongoing horrific treatment of them – pales in comparison to anything except, possibly, the unnecessary dropping of two nuclear bombs on Japan.

Sorry, but your dissertation of an excuse just doesn't cut the mustard – or maybe your mother never told you that two wrongs don't make a right. Or in the case of the U.S., dozens of never ending wrongs. Unless you really open your eyes and mind and understand the truth, you will never come off as anything more than an apologist for the top 1/10th of the top 1%.

Harry S Nydick / June 17, 2018
This was a reply to William, but comes off looking as an original comment and criticism of Caity, with whom I am in complete agreement on todays article.
jrgjrg / June 18, 2018
Not just the dropping of two atomic bombs on Japan, but remember that Gen. LeMay firebombed every city in Japan before the bombs were dropped, causing at least another half million deaths. Robert MacNamara said in an interview that if the US had lost the Second World War they both would have been tried as war criminals, and it would be right. See:

https://player.vimeo.com/video/149799416

AriusArmenian / June 17, 2018
Always impressed by Caitlin driving a bulldozer through lying narratives. We need more Caitlin's; we need an antiwar mass movement of Caitlin's. But the antiwar movement is very weak and it is divided against itself.

In the 1990's there was a coming together of the Chronicles paleoconservatives and the CounterPunch progressives against the US/NATO attack on Yugoslavia. But today Thomas Fleming and Chronicles have retreated and those controlling CounterPunch have explicitly rejected an alliance with the 'right' against the US march to war.

I wish I could share the Caitlin enthusiasm for the future but I am depressed and fearful for the future. The US public is asleep. The US is gearing up for war in Europe and Asia. Starting with Clinton each president has murdered about a million souls. They are gearing up for a bigger war in the MENA and even Eastern Europe with Iran as the major target and will likely claim another million+.

From Jungian psychology I learned that unless the opposites come close together change (a birth out of the tyranny of the status quo) will not happen. The elites in control of the US use the fake dialectic of the major two parties to keep us apart. Those in charge of each pole of the fake dialectic derive power from defending it against the 'other' and see alliance with the 'other' as a diminution of their power (a good example is those in control of CounterPunch arguing against antiwar alliance with the 'right'; that they are captured by their power drive is plain to see).

Liberals (neolibs) and many progressives have walked straight into a trap set by the CIA that engineered a Cold War v2. They knew the neocons would come along. The CIA, Wall Street, military, NSA are marching to war. They thirst for their holy war. They are the supremacist 'exceptional and indispensable' while the rest of the world is unexceptional and dispensable.

If the left and right do not come together in an antiwar alliance then how can the warmongering trajectory of the US change?

geoffreyskoll / June 17, 2018
It's just like you, Caitlin, to bring up such quibbles as genocide, slavery, torture, and a few others too minor to even mention. We're talking IDEALS here. You know like complete global domination, slavish catering to the most exploitive class in human history–the stuff that makes America great!
Lee Yates / June 17, 2018
I agree that the U.S. is Imperialist and has been for a long time. However, it is false that Russia opposes the US kleptocracy or represents anything other than the same bankster/gangsters that run the West. They came into the fold after the end of the Soviet Union, and there they remain, probably not too happy about it, but neither are we right. The elites from all over launder money, hide wealth enjoy power and luxury beyond our imagination. A small spat between them is death sentence for the rest of us, but they will make up and enjoy their stolen wealth again.

The moral authority that the West or USA enjoys is a hollow thing, much like Christianity at the height of the Church's power. But the words are still there maybe some day a true believer will come along and do something about them.

ger / June 17, 2018
Forgive me, I could not get beyond the 'undermine America's moral authority'. I take it, Mattis means the 'moral authority' to starve the Yemenis to death and deny them medicine while they are dying . aided by our French Poodle and a mad woman from the Isles! Or maybe the 'moral authority' of Albright when she said killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children 'was worth it'. Or maybe it was 'moral authority' of Clinton, giggling over the sadist murder of Kaddafi. Some how, as an American I don't feel 'moral authority' , all I feel is the pain of inhumanity.
jrgjrg / June 17, 2018
No, no, no, you're still not getting it. Let me explain it to you. It means the authority of the autocrats to determine what's moral for you. They themselves are above morality, like Nietzsche taught, remember? Authoritarianism.

Now do you understand?

elkojohn / June 17, 2018
As was hinted at by the FBI-IG report, neither political party in the criminal U.S. government is complying with law (domestic nor international). The U.S. government system is an organized crime syndicate of liars, thieves and murders. The ruling class and the inside players of the secret government consider the common folk to be deplorable, trailer-park trash.

That's the mind-set of the "holier-than-thou" professionals working inside the U.S. government. Whatever trust, loyalty and respect citizens had for this government has been completely squandered – and voters (not Putin) gave the FU finger to the status quo by electing Trump.

The treasonous, seditious, murdering 2-party dictatorship has absolutely NO ONE to blame but themselves. The time has come to eliminate and defund the secret espionage agencies that run our government, – and which have morphed into crime syndicates. Ditto the two political parties. Until we see all the top level law-breakers in jail (i.e., Clinton, Bush, Obama), until we witness 2/3's of the House and the Senate being purged and replaced, until we witness the complete dismantling of the FED, until we witness ALL military bases around the world being closed and our troops brought home, until we witness the M-I-C's budget cut down to 1/4th and used ONLY for national protection, until we witness a purge of the CIA/FBI cartel, until we witness manufacturing being restored to this country, until we witness the USA cutting all special interest lobbying (in particular, Israel and Saudi Arabia), until we witness the break-up of the death grip that Wall St. and the banking monopoly has on our economy, until we witness the full restoration of the "rule of law" in our government, – until then, it will be the absolute, open, in-your-face, tyrannical, 24/7, lawlessness of the U.S. government that destroys this nation.

So I disagree with James Mattis, that the U.S. holds the moral high ground.

jrgjrg / June 17, 2018
You're paying more respect to it than it deserves by giving it a clinical diagnosis, implying "projection" as a psychological defense. Let's call it by its simple name: dirty rotten lying, propaganda, trickery. They're playing the "I'm rubber and you're glue" game. It's not like the assholes don't know they are lying – of course they do! And they know we know it, too, and don't care.
WillD / June 17, 2018
Mattis didn't realise how well he described Trump. When you look at what Trump's regime has done since taking office last year, it 'trumps' [pun intended] Putin's efforts, such as they are, by a mile. Putin could never hope to achieve so much in such a short time, if that's what he wanted to do.

It seems to be that every criticism leveled at Russia, and China even, is a simple reflection of what the USA is doing. Deflection. Classic 'pot calling the kettle black' stuff.

All one has to do is change a few names in the narrative – replace Putin with Trump, Russia / China with USA. That's it. Easy.

jrgjrg / June 17, 2018
You're paying more respect to it than it deserves by giving it a clinical diagnosis, implying "projection" as a psychological defense. Let's call it by its simple name: dirty rotten lying, propaganda, trickery. It's not like the assholes don't know they are lying – of course they do! And they know we know it, too, and don't care.
WillD / June 17, 2018
No, you misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not saying he/they use it as a defense, but that they don't realize how close it is to what it (the USA) is doing.

Believe me, I have no respect for Mattis & that mob, nor Putin for that matter. None of them deserve respect.

I agree with you on the dirty rotten lying, too. They do know they are lying, but don't know how close to the truth it is when applied to them.

jrgjrg / June 17, 2018
No worries. We are in the "post-truth era." That sounds crazy, I know. The plutocrats are discussing this exact topic this year at the Bilderberg Conference.

[Jun 17, 2018] As for Putin, it could be, that he is, for now, on a footing of equal to the insiders of above, he must somehow understand (Putin gives a public impression to be cognitively superior to all other political tarts of the moment) that real problems are global

Jun 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

m___ , June 17, 2018 at 9:24 am GMT

@mikkkkas

Dramatic shift in analysis of Saker,

As yours truly, we noticed the drastic shift as to pointing to supranational guidance of international political events. As for his mention, blaming Trump and Netanyahu to be suppreme leaders and deciders, we see them rather as spokespersons, blowing and hissing publicly the script of what Saker calls the Anglo-Jewish maffia, the only subgroup that sorted for quality, not quantity in strategy(global evidently and necessarily) and membership for in-group only benefit. Elitist, subjectively better organized than any entity other, territorially mostly independent in case of emergency, and moral conviction based on historical Judaist values, strategies and tactics. Play all sides and stay invisible.

Below the prudent lines of Saker quoted.

The AngloZionist Empire is not based in the US, or in the EU, or Israel, or anywhere else on the planet. It is a trans-national entity with regional variations and which includes different interest groups under its umbrella. You can think of it as a gigantic criminal gang racketeering the entire planet for "protection". To think that by presenting a "liberal" face to these thugs will gain you their support is extremely naive as these guys don't care about your face: what they want is your submission.

As for Putin, it could be, that he is, for now, on a footing of equal to the insiders of above, he must somehow understand (Putin gives a public impression to be cognitively superior to all other political tarts of the moment) that real problems are global, and Russian nationalism, or international expansion based on Russian nationalism are just a political tool to rally bulk humanity. Very similar to the palm oil, corn syrup and digital porn obese consumerism of the West promotion. At most bickering and infighting can be done by visible actors as Putin, Trump, Xi (affected indirectly), but there must be a scenario, and war cannot be anything more then policing.

To be noticed, that it pleads for Saker's intellectualism to correct and even reverse, after due analysis his opinions unlike a Tom Engelhardt(at that qualitative rather inferior). No "to big to fail" here. Let's wait and see, how Saker's intuition can take him into quantitative analysis of what moves beyond and against nationalist and EU, US, Russia, China dialectics. The old adagio of the information age: networks, was historically present in International Jewry. One can be a policeman, be a thief, but foremost one is a Jew.

Honest writing of Saker.

How good are these supranational, corporatacracy (another commenter), "globally organized elites" groups with better cohesion? To our definite impression, not good enough, though way above the bulk of humanity and most of the middle class media comprehension. Two singular dramas of our age, that will decide the twenty-first century. Better and not good enough. Only to be arrested by bringing in AI, eugenetics, rebranding goals and focus. It is in itself a pocket drama repeated over and over that analysis is mostly litterary, never relies on the best of information, is fragmented. Even today indexing big data lumps could solve this partly. Alternative media in the first place apply the same archaic methods while better tools are available. That said unz.com is above the fray in focussing and searching methods. It should spark some hidden outliers glued into the bulk of the deplorables by individual fate.

War-ing and economics, the epistomology of politics, the focus of daily news, should be seen as consequences, not prime causes of attention. In the end they impose toxicity, migrations, excess population densities, excess total human numbers. The goal itself of humanity should be reasserted as quality of life for all standing and future humans. Then strategy and tactics derive from there. Why? Well the same supra national elites, the only ones that can take on the essentials tend to forget they are frogging in the same tub, that nature probably using more disruptive method will take care of the human plague if not.

[Jun 17, 2018] Optimism Caitlin Johnstone

Notable quotes:
"... The Rachel Maddow Show ..."
Jun 17, 2018 | caitlinjohnstone.com

I'm not sure how far up the military-industrial complex's ass one's head needs to be to think that one single step toward peace is a gigantic take-all-the-chips win for the impoverished North Korea, but many of Trump's political enemies are taking it even further.

Senate Democrats have introduced a bill to make it more difficult for Trump to withdraw US troops from South Korea, because while you can always count on Capitol Hill to make it incredibly easy for a president to deploy military personnel around the globe, giving that same office the power to bring troops home is a completely different matter.

Surprising no one, MSNBC's cartoon children's program The Rachel Maddow Show took home the trophy for jaw-dropping, shark-jumping ridiculousness with an eighteen-minute Alex Jones impression claiming that the chief architect of the Korean negotiations was none other than (and if you can't guess whose name I'm going to write once we get out of these parentheses I deeply envy your ignorance on this matter) Vladimir Putin.

[Jun 17, 2018] After WWII it took most Europeans less than a generation to revert to the traditional anti-Russian attitudes

Notable quotes:
"... There is a strong, EU domestic anti-Russian population based on hundreds of years of history, resentment over losses (Germany, Poland, Sweden, Finland), self-brainwashing about perceived abuse (Poland, Baltics, eastern Europeans in general), hatred and contempt towards anything 'eastern', and the traditional anglo anti-Russian policies. Recently new emotional hatreds have been added with endless demonising Russia about xenophobia, hooligans, gays, stray dogs, anything the creative propagandists can push. Most Europeans turn out on reflection to be quite gullible and stupid. ..."
"... There are a few minor exceptions and some Latin nations are more level headed. There is also a minority view in the German world, mostly based on their business realism that is neutral toward Russia, but not pro-Russian. There will be no political rapprochement between EU and Russia. There will be better business relations because water flows downhill and EU-Russia economic ties are such an obvious fit. The cultural hatred and political hostility will go on. ..."
"... After WWII it took most Europeans less than a generation to revert to the traditional anti-Russian attitudes. In some cases, nations that were literally saved from extermination were more resentful than grateful. In Poland it took less than a year, in Czech Republic 20 years, but the old visceral hatreds emerged again. ..."
"... Failure has never discouraged true fanatics. It is a mistake to see them only in Washington and London, there are plenty of them in positions of power in Berlin, Paris, Warsaw, and even Stockholm. ..."
"... And in Washington the loudest ones are often bitter ethnics from eastern Europe. I honestly think it is about 50-50 whether this gets escalated beyond all reason and we face a catastrophe (so I admit that I don't know :). ..."
"... On the one hand there are the nukes. On the other, it is so hard to climb down for any ideological fanatic. They felt that they were so close, when they bombed Beograd and Russia did nothing, they thought it was all just a question of time. And then Putin happened and the dream has been slowly dying. Imagine the painful void that they have to live with every day. So they hate. Any concession to people who hate you is counter-productive, thus there will be no deal between Russia-EU. Only obvious trade. ..."
Jun 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

Beckow , June 17, 2018 at 6:01 pm GMT

... EU wants cheap, reliable energy from Russia and to export to Russia as much as possible without interference from US. That is pure business. But the dominant political forces in EU are anti-Russia, some because they are fed by the security-military-academic spending, some because they 'studied' and were politically formed in US or UK. Some because that's just the way they are.

There is a strong, EU domestic anti-Russian population based on hundreds of years of history, resentment over losses (Germany, Poland, Sweden, Finland), self-brainwashing about perceived abuse (Poland, Baltics, eastern Europeans in general), hatred and contempt towards anything 'eastern', and the traditional anglo anti-Russian policies. Recently new emotional hatreds have been added with endless demonising Russia about xenophobia, hooligans, gays, stray dogs, anything the creative propagandists can push. Most Europeans turn out on reflection to be quite gullible and stupid.

There are a few minor exceptions and some Latin nations are more level headed. There is also a minority view in the German world, mostly based on their business realism that is neutral toward Russia, but not pro-Russian. There will be no political rapprochement between EU and Russia. There will be better business relations because water flows downhill and EU-Russia economic ties are such an obvious fit. The cultural hatred and political hostility will go on.

After WWII it took most Europeans less than a generation to revert to the traditional anti-Russian attitudes. In some cases, nations that were literally saved from extermination were more resentful than grateful. In Poland it took less than a year, in Czech Republic 20 years, but the old visceral hatreds emerged again.

My advise to Russia would be to mind its own business and not try to sacrifice for the others or to help them. It has always backfired because the cultural milieu in Europe is naturally resentful of Russia and the east in general. Business doesn't change that.

Beckow , June 17, 2018 at 11:10 pm GMT

@Kiza

Thanks. Current trends strengthen Euro-asia (and thus China and Russia), so West will have to do something, otherwise they get weaker over time.

There has been a maximalist group in the West who believe that ' anything is possible ', that even with nukes it is possible to defeat and dismember Russia. The key factor would be internal instability inside Russia. Maidan, Saaksavilli's mad dash in 2008, and the support for Caucas separatists were all done with that in mind. It has mostly failed with Russia becoming more united in the process.

Failure has never discouraged true fanatics. It is a mistake to see them only in Washington and London, there are plenty of them in positions of power in Berlin, Paris, Warsaw, and even Stockholm.

And in Washington the loudest ones are often bitter ethnics from eastern Europe. I honestly think it is about 50-50 whether this gets escalated beyond all reason and we face a catastrophe (so I admit that I don't know :).

On the one hand there are the nukes. On the other, it is so hard to climb down for any ideological fanatic. They felt that they were so close, when they bombed Beograd and Russia did nothing, they thought it was all just a question of time. And then Putin happened and the dream has been slowly dying. Imagine the painful void that they have to live with every day. So they hate. Any concession to people who hate you is counter-productive, thus there will be no deal between Russia-EU. Only obvious trade.

[Jun 16, 2018] Putin and orthodox religion

Jun 16, 2018 | www.unz.com

Frankie P

It is completely unnecessary and foolish to bring up and try to argue about the faith of another man, especially by superimposing one's own views onto the matter. It's clear that you believe it is impossible or highly unlikely to have high intelligence and be a true believer, but to me that is neither here nor there.

The point is that Putin realizes that the Orthodox faith is the cultural framework of the Russian nation; its development historically, socially and culturally rest in the hands Orthodox Christianity. Yes! Russia's history and the levers of power were wrenched away from its traditional Orthodox roots by those intent on revenge, those with a mad desire to unite the world under the banner of international communism, bringing about (so they hoped and continue to hope) the birth of their messiah. Thankfully that chapter of history is over, but it's not over for the chosen: intent on revenge on Russia, just as they are forever intent on their innocence in all historical matters, they have moved on and rooted themselves into another host: the USA. They will be smacked down and put in their place again, but I hesitate to estimate the scheduling. The main question is how many human lives will they end through their machinations before the smack down.

Frankie P

EugeneGur , June 15, 2018 at 4:22 pm GMT

@Frankie P

The point is that Putin realizes that the Orthodox faith is the cultural framework of the Russian nation; its development historically, socially and culturally rest in the hands Orthodox Christianity.

No, it's not. No one can enter the same river twice. Russia will thankfully never go back to its Orthodox roots completely, although Orthodoxy will co-exist peacefully within the secular society. Putin's public insistence on rituals of the Orthodox faith is one of his least attractive features.

Thankfully that chapter of history is over

It's not over until it's over. This sentence of yours simply shows how misunderstood the Soviet period of the Russian history is in the West.

The Soviet Union has been gone for more than a quarter of a century and yet it is – to borrow a phrase from a popular Soviet song – is more alive than the living. The Soviet period has become a sort of a yardstick against which the modern Russia is compared in every area: culture, economy, moral climate, everything.

It is a universal agreement that in many areas Russia doesn't measure up to the Soviet standards – culture and education are the prime examples. Hardly anyone in Russia would disagree that in 25 years Russia hasn't produced anything even remotely comparable with the Soviet achievements in this spheres. Until it does – the Soviet Union will live one.

[Jun 15, 2018] The West, not Putin, organized and supported a coup bringing to the power a super-corrupt illegitimate "government" that relies on armed neo-Nazi groups for the control of the county

The "collective West" clearly pursued its own goals in Ukraine, and the last thing they were concerned was well being of Ukraine people. Russia also viewed Ukraine mainly from the position of its own interests, although being isolated they provided somewhat better terms for economic cooperation, just to counter influence of the EU and the USA.
The USA wanted the Ukraine to became yet another Baltic republic as a part of its geopolitical efforts of encircling Russia and, if possible, installing another Yeltsin-style comprador government. EU wanted a market for its good and to exclude Russia from using Ukrainian resources as well as the leverage to get better prices for Russian natural resources.
So the Ukrainian people got on the receiving end of those efforts and paid a huge price. Was it unavoidable or not is difficult to say. May be less bloodshed was possible but economic decimation of Ukraine and conversion it into a debt slave was in the cards, and probably was not avoidable. It just occurred faster and the drop of the standard of living went deeper that in other circumstance.
For all his corruption and thugishness Yanukovich tried to play Russia against the West and get some concession from both. Now such a policy is impossible as the country de-facto lost independence as happens with any debt-slave.
So the conflict in Donbass became important for Poroshenko government as the mean of uniting people, who became disillusioned in the results of EuroMaydan and pointing to Russia as a scapegoat for all their difficulties. In a way Poroshenko now needs Donbass conflict to survive politically.
Jun 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

Quartermaster , June 14, 2018 at 12:37 pm GMT

While there is some "hysteria" when it comes to Russia, there is also much truth out there, some of which the author is willing to write off as little more than conspiracy theories.

It is passing strange that those who have strongly criticized Putin have ended up dead. Anytime one appears to be a serious threat to Putin's position they end up dead. It is possible that Putin isn't responsible, but given the numbers and the circumstances, it is likely he knows what is going on.

While Putin was never head of the KGB, much of what he has been up to was learned form iron Felix's organization. To say Putin is a KGB thug is far from being out of line.

What he has done in Ukraine should make the man, and the country he heads, a pariah. Eastern Europe is right to be concerned. The fact that Putin has stated, rather pointedly, that the extent of the USSR is Russia makes the accusation of him being a Soviet revanchist appropriate as well.

Much of what the author seeks to write off as hysteria, isn't. That "hysteria" is a proper concern for what Putin is up to, and what he intends. Fortunately, Russia is too impoverished to all Putin to realize his neo-Tsarist empire. And in pursuing his self-aggrandizing path, he impoverishes his people even more.

EugeneGur , June 14, 2018 at 7:53 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

It is passing strange that those who have strongly criticized Putin have ended up dead.

The logic of this is fascinating in its perversity. Lot's of people who don't criticize Putin at all or downright admire him die including under unclear circumstances – the West just doesn't notice. For example, several Russian diplomat have died suddenly and prematurely in various countries – out UN representative Churkin would be the prime example. Can you imaging how many wonderful conspiracy theories we could have concocted should we be so inclined?

It's the same exact "logic" ridiculed in "conclusions" like this: "Everyone who eats cucumbers dies". And those who don't live forever?

What he has done in Ukraine should make the man, and the country he heads, a pariah.

He, meaning Putin, hasn't done anything in Ukraine – the West did. The West organized and supported a coup bringing to the power a super-corrupt illegitimate "government" that relies on armed neo-Nazi groups for the control of the county. Now Ukraine is a failed state with the dominant neo-Nazi ideology, nonexistent economy, impoverished and fleeing population and repressive political system, not to mention a civil war. All Putin did was to resist this development as much as possible, and I do not believe he should be blamed for that.

jilles dykstra , June 14, 2018 at 2:27 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

"What he has done in Ukraine should make the man, and the country he heads, a pariah. "

What did he do there ?
And what did the CIA do there ?

fredyetagain aka superhonky , June 14, 2018 at 5:05 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

"Neo-Tsarist empire." Ha, that's rich. Congrats, you've managed to outdo even the most unhinged anti-Putin elements of the l'chaimstream media.
"impoverishes his people even more." You mean be improving their lives as measured by virtually every metric since kicking out the (((Russian))) banksters and their (((American))) advisers who were robbing the place blind? Dude, you're delusional. Go peddle your nonsense elsewhere.

[Jun 15, 2018] Putin, Donbass, emigration of Ukranians to Russia and US neocons foreign policy

An interesting point about refugees and emigration of Ukrainians to Russia.
Notable quotes:
"... Donbass is a civil conflict involving some Russian support for the rebels, who're overwhelmingly from the territory of the former Ukrainian SSR. These individuals have a realistic basis to oppose the Kiev based regimes that came after the overthrow of a democratically elected Ukrainian president. ..."
"... During the American Revolution, most of the pro-British fighters were said to be colonists already based in America. Furthermore, the American revolutionaries received significant support from France. With these factors in mind, the Donbass rebels don't seem less legit than the American revolutionaries. ..."
"... Some Kiev regime elements positively reference the 1995 Croat ethnic cleansing of Krajina Serbs (known as Operation Storm) as a solution for ending the rebel position in Donbass. Russia doesn't seek a massive refugee problem in Donbass and some other parts of the former Ukrainian SSR. As is, a sizeable number of Ukrainian residents have fled to Russia. ..."
"... Putin isn't anti-US in the manner claimed by Peters. Moreover, Peters is clearly more anti-Russian (in a narrow minded way at that) than what can be reasonably said of how Putin views the US. Putin's obvious differences with neocons, neolibs and flat out Russia haters isn't by default anti-US. He was the first foreign leader to console the US following 9/11. The Russian president has been consistently on record for favoring better US-Russian ties (even inquiring about Russia joining NATO at one point), thereby explaining why he has appeared to have preferred Trump over Clinton. ..."
"... the Russians (by and large) prefer predictability. As a general rule this is otherwise true. However, Clinton's neocon/neolib stated views on Russia have been to the point where many Russians felt willing to take a chance with Trump, whose campaign included a comparatively more sympathetic take of their country. At the same time, a good number of Russians questioned whether Trump would maintain that stance. ..."
Jun 15, 2018 | www.unz.com

Mikhail , Website June 14, 2018 at 10:28 pm GMT

@Carlton Meyer

Peters has been hardcore anti-Russian and anti-Serb. His views are quite collapsible. Regarding one of his mass media appearances

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/07/17/dnc-kiev-regime-collusion-isnt-americas-best-interests.html

Last week, Fox News host Tucker Carlson, received well deserved praise for taking to task the permeating anti-Russian biases. The highlight of Carlson's exchanges was his encounter with Ralph Peters, who for years has spouted grossly inaccurate propaganda against Russia. Antiwar.com and Russia Insider, are among the counter-establishment English language venues commenting on the Carlson-Peters discussion. The US foreign policy establishment realist leaning National Interest carried a lengthy piece on Carlson's challenge to the neocon/neolib foreign policy perceptions. For the record, more can and should be said in reply to Peter's comments.

Peters falsely claims that Russia hasn't made a concerted effort in confronting ISIS. In one of his more accurate moments, CNN's Wolf Blitzer said that the ISIS claimed shoot down of a Russian civilian airliner over Egypt, was in response to Russia's war against ISIS. You've to be either a liar or clueless to not recognize why Russia has actively opposed ISIS. The latter sees Russia as an enemy, while having a good number of individuals with roots in Russia and some other parts of the former USSR.

Peters' characterization of Russia targeting civilian areas is disingenuous. Over the years, the matter of collateral damage is something periodically brought up in response to those killed by US and Israeli military actions.

Peters offers no proof to his suspect claim that Russian President Vladimir Putin kills journalists. There're numerous anti-Putin advocates alive and well in Russia. That country does have a violence problem. Recall what the US was like in the 1960s thru early 1970′s. For that matter, Bernie Sanders isn't blamed for the pro-Sanders person who attempted to kill Republican lawmakers.

Given the situations concerning Kosovo and northern Cyprus, Peters is being a flat out hypocrite regarding Crimea. Donbass is a civil conflict involving some Russian support for the rebels, who're overwhelmingly from the territory of the former Ukrainian SSR. These individuals have a realistic basis to oppose the Kiev based regimes that came after the overthrow of a democratically elected Ukrainian president.

During the American Revolution, most of the pro-British fighters were said to be colonists already based in America. Furthermore, the American revolutionaries received significant support from France. With these factors in mind, the Donbass rebels don't seem less legit than the American revolutionaries.

Some Kiev regime elements positively reference the 1995 Croat ethnic cleansing of Krajina Serbs (known as Operation Storm) as a solution for ending the rebel position in Donbass. Russia doesn't seek a massive refugee problem in Donbass and some other parts of the former Ukrainian SSR. As is, a sizeable number of Ukrainian residents have fled to Russia.

Putin isn't anti-US in the manner claimed by Peters. Moreover, Peters is clearly more anti-Russian (in a narrow minded way at that) than what can be reasonably said of how Putin views the US. Putin's obvious differences with neocons, neolibs and flat out Russia haters isn't by default anti-US. He was the first foreign leader to console the US following 9/11. The Russian president has been consistently on record for favoring better US-Russian ties (even inquiring about Russia joining NATO at one point), thereby explaining why he has appeared to have preferred Trump over Clinton.

Some (including Trump) disagree with that view, which includes the notion that the Russians (by and large) prefer predictability. As a general rule this is otherwise true. However, Clinton's neocon/neolib stated views on Russia have been to the point where many Russians felt willing to take a chance with Trump, whose campaign included a comparatively more sympathetic take of their country. At the same time, a good number of Russians questioned whether Trump would maintain that stance.

Steve in Greensboro , June 14, 2018 at 10:42 pm GMT
@Rurik

I suppose many of us saw the Tucker with Max Boot. Boot seemed unhinged, really emotionally overwrought by Tucker raising commonsensical challenges to his neocon orthodoxy. Sad, angry man.

[Jun 13, 2018] How False Flag Operations Are Carried Out Today by Philip M. GIRALDI

Highly recommended!
When the media is controlled by people responsible for false flag operation chances to use investigation to discredit this false flag operation, no matter how many evidence they have is close to zero
In other word false flag operation is perfect weapon for the "sole superpower" and due to this status entail very little risks.
Notable quotes:
"... Today's false flag operations are generally carried out by intelligence agencies and non-government actors including terrorist groups, but they are only considered successful if the true attribution of an action remains secret. ..."
"... False flags can be involved in other sorts of activity as well. The past year's two major alleged chemical attacks carried out against Syrian civilians that resulted in President Donald Trump and associates launching 160 cruise missiles are pretty clearly false flag operations carried out by the rebels and terrorist groups that controlled the affected areas at the time. ..."
"... Because the rebels succeeded in convincing much of the world that the Syrian government had carried out the attacks, one might consider their false flag efforts to have been extremely successful. ..."
"... The remedy against false flag operations such as the recent one in Syria is, of course, to avoid taking the bait and instead waiting until a thorough and objective inspection of the evidence has taken place. The United States, Britain and France did not do that, preferring instead to respond to hysterical press reports by "doing something." If the U.N. investigation of the alleged attack turns up nothing, a distinct possibility, it is unlikely that they will apologize for having committed a war crime. ..."
"... The other major false flag that has recently surfaced is the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury England on March 4 th . Russia had no credible motive to carry out the attack and had, in fact, good reasons not to do so. ..."
"... Unfortunately, May proved wrong and the debate ignited over her actions, which included the expulsion of twenty-three Russian diplomats, has done her severe damage. Few now believe that Russia actually carried out the poisoning and there is a growing body of opinion suggesting that it was actually a false flag executed by the British government or even by the CIA. ..."
"... The lesson that should be learned from Syria and Skripal is that if "an incident" looks like it has no obvious motive behind it, there is a high probability that it is a false flag. ..."
Apr 26, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

False Flag is a concept that goes back centuries. It was considered to be a legitimate ploy by the Greeks and Romans, where a military force would pretend to be friendly to get close to an enemy before dropping the pretense and raising its banners to reveal its own affiliation just before launching an attack. In the sea battles of the eighteenth century among Spain, France and Britain hoisting an enemy flag instead of one's own to confuse the opponent was considered to be a legitimate ruse de guerre , but it was only "honorable" if one reverted to one's own flag before engaging in combat.

Today's false flag operations are generally carried out by intelligence agencies and non-government actors including terrorist groups, but they are only considered successful if the true attribution of an action remains secret. There is nothing honorable about them as their intention is to blame an innocent party for something that it did not do. There has been a lot of such activity lately and it was interesting to learn by way of a leak that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has developed a capability to mimic the internet fingerprints of other foreign intelligence services. That means that when the media is trumpeting news reports that the Russians or Chinese hacked into U.S. government websites or the sites of major corporations, it could actually have been the CIA carrying out the intrusion and making it look like it originated in Moscow or Beijing. Given that capability, there has been considerable speculation in the alternative media that it was actually the CIA that interfered in the 2016 national elections in the United States.

False flags can be involved in other sorts of activity as well. The past year's two major alleged chemical attacks carried out against Syrian civilians that resulted in President Donald Trump and associates launching 160 cruise missiles are pretty clearly false flag operations carried out by the rebels and terrorist groups that controlled the affected areas at the time. The most recent reported attack on April 7th might not have occurred at all according to doctors and other witnesses who were actually in Douma. Because the rebels succeeded in convincing much of the world that the Syrian government had carried out the attacks, one might consider their false flag efforts to have been extremely successful.

The remedy against false flag operations such as the recent one in Syria is, of course, to avoid taking the bait and instead waiting until a thorough and objective inspection of the evidence has taken place. The United States, Britain and France did not do that, preferring instead to respond to hysterical press reports by "doing something." If the U.N. investigation of the alleged attack turns up nothing, a distinct possibility, it is unlikely that they will apologize for having committed a war crime.

The other major false flag that has recently surfaced is the poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury England on March 4th. Russia had no credible motive to carry out the attack and had, in fact, good reasons not to do so. The allegations made by British Prime Minister Theresa May about the claimed nerve agent being "very likely" Russian in origin have been debunked, in part through examination by the U.K.'s own chemical weapons lab. May, under attack even within her own party, needed a good story and a powerful enemy to solidify her own hold on power so false flagging something to Russia probably appeared to be just the ticket as Moscow would hardly be able to deny the "facts" being invented in London. Unfortunately, May proved wrong and the debate ignited over her actions, which included the expulsion of twenty-three Russian diplomats, has done her severe damage. Few now believe that Russia actually carried out the poisoning and there is a growing body of opinion suggesting that it was actually a false flag executed by the British government or even by the CIA.

The lesson that should be learned from Syria and Skripal is that if "an incident" looks like it has no obvious motive behind it, there is a high probability that it is a false flag. A bit of caution in assigning blame is appropriate given that the alternative would be a precipitate and likely disproportionate response that could easily escalate into a shooting war.

Tags: CIA

[Jun 12, 2018] In The Western World Truth Is An Endangered Species by Paul Craig Roberts

Jun 10, 2018 | www.unz.com

Nowhere in the Western world is truth respected. Even universities are imposing censorship and speech control. Governments are shutting down, and will eventually criminalize, all explanations that differ from official ones. The Western world no longer has a print and TV media. In its place there is a propaganda ministry for the ruling elite.

Whistleblowers are prosecuted and imprisoned despite their protection by federal statue. The US Department of Justice is a Department of Injustice. It has been a long time since any justice flowed from the DOJ.

The total corruption of the print and TV media led to the rise of Intermet media such as Wikileaks, led by Julian Assange, a prisoner since 2012.
Assange is an Australian and Ecuadorian citizen. He is not an American citizen. Yet US politicians and media claim that he is guilty of treason because he published official documents leaked to Wikileaks that prove the duplicity and criminality of the US government.

It is strictly impossible for a non-citizen to be guilty of treason. It is strickly impossible under the US Constitution for the reporting of facts to be spying. The function of the media is to expose and to hold accountable the government. This function is no longer performed by the Western print and TV media.

Washington wants revenge and is determined to get it. If Assange were as corrupt at the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, National Public Radio, MSNBC, etc., he would have reported the leaker to Washington, not published the information, and retired as a multi-millionaire with Washington's thanks. However, unfortunately for Assange, he had integrity.

Integrity today in the Western world has no value. You cannot find integrity in the government, in the global corporations, in the universities and schools, and most certainly not in the media.

After leaving Assange, an Australian citizen, to Washington's mercy since 2012, belated pro-Assange protests in Australia forced the US vassal state to come to Assange's aid before the new corrupt president of Ecuador sells him to Washington for muilti-millons of dollars by revoking his asylum.

When the story was printed in the Sydney Morning Herald, the incompetent or brainwashed, or bought-and-paid-for journalist, Nick Miller, wrote:

"Assange entered the embassy on June 19, 2012, after he had exhausted his appeals against an extradition order to go to Sweden to face rape and sexual assault allegations.

Swedish authorities have since closed their investigation, saying it couldn't continue without Assange's presence in their country." https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/australian-officials-spotted-in-mysterious-assange-visit-20180608-p4zk7w.html

Nick Miller has committed libel, whether from his ignorance or from pay.

There was no extradition order from Sweden for Assange to be returned to Sweden "to face rape and sexual assault allegations." No such charges were issued by the Swedish prosecutorial office, and no such charges were made by the women involved.

The case had already been closed by the Swedish prosecutorial office, and the two women who willingly shared their beds with Assange did not press any charges. The Swedish female prosecutor, who many suspect reopened the closed case at the urging of Washington, wrote in the extradition request that she only wanted Assange for questioning.

Normally, extraditions are not granted for questioning. There has to be actual criminal charges, and there were no such charges against Assange. However, under pressure from Washington, a corrupt UK court granted, perhaps for the first time in history, extradition for questioning.

Assange's attorneys understood that if Assange left his embassy refuge and travelled to Sweden to be questioned, there was nothing to prevent Sweden from turning him over to Washington to be tortured, as Washington does, into confession of some crime.

Consequently, Assange's attorneys told the Swedish female prosecutor, a person who seems shortchanged on integrity, that Assange would be available for questioning in his place of refuge. The prosecutor, showing her hand, refused to question Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. After refusing for many months while the presstitutes blackened Assange's repution as a "rapist who was escaping justice," the sort of ignorant nonsense that Nick Miller writes, the prosecutor consented to go to London to interview Assange.

As nothing incriminating emerged from the questioning and as neither of the women claimed that they were raped, the female prosecutorclosed the case for the second time. But the corrupt British would not release Assange. They claimed that he was wanted for jumping bail, an argument that made no sense as the charge for his arrest had been dismissed. But Washington insisted, and British "justice" again served Washington instead of justice.

The basis of the political assault on Assange came from the concern of one of his willing sex partners that he had not used a condum. With everyone worried crazy about HIV and Aids, the woman inquired at a Swedish public office if Assange could be required to take a HIV/Aids test. Assange, not realizing his vulnerability, apparently refused the test, and thus opened himself to a controversy that Washington immediately took advantage of.

It is safe for rock stars to have groupies, but not for truth-tellers.

If you understand the extreme extent to which the US government has gone, riding roughshod over many laws and traditions, to destroy Assange, perhaps you can understand the threats that the very few of us who have the education, experience, and integrity to tell you the truth live under.

When I write an article, it does not inform me. I already know. When I inform you, I am doing so at my risk. I am not going to take this risk if readers do not support this website. I do this for you. If it is not important to you, I have no need to do it.

You need to support truth-tellers as we are a disappearing breed under constant assault.

[Jun 11, 2018] Is Putin Is Freeing Europe, One Country At A Time by J

Jun 11, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Marine Le Pen says Putin is liberating Europe, and she's right. Le Pen, says she sees signs of what in her opinion is the beginning of Europe's liberation. Soaring popularity of right-of-center forces in several European nations, coupled with Putin's meeting with Austrian Chancellor Kurz during his visit to Vienna. "The world today is making a choice different from that made over the past 30 years. It is going to be a genuine peaceful and democratic revolution, a turn away from savage globalization, universal free exchange and immigration. It will be a turn towards protection," she stated. "Italy, Hungary, Austria - we are witnesses to the beginning of the liberation of Europe!" In her opinion, in Europe there should be no place for supra-national entities whose decisions would outweigh those made by national governments.

Five-Star party supporters gather for a rally in Piazza del Popolo two days before the March 4 elections in downtown Rome. Italian voters delivered a shock to Europe not felt since the UK's Brexit vote in June 2016. Two populist parties came out on top: The NATO/EU-skeptic Five-Star Movement took home over 32 percent, of the vote while the right-wing Lega party garnered a surprising 17 percent. The fact that both parties have called for better relations with Russia led immediately to the seemingly inevitable accusation that it was the Kremlin, not Italian voters, who was ultimately responsible for the outcome. Two populist parties won big time in Italy, favoring Putin.

What's Putin's secret?

Putin turned towards the most unlikely of sources, an American think tank based in Oakland, the Independent Institute -- whose founding member of their Board of Advisors, is Lawrence Kudlow (who now serves as Director of the National Economic Council under President Trump), had detailed how the tax cut policies of Democratic Party President John Kennedy, and Republican Party President Ronald Reagan saved the American economy during some of its most dangerous economic times, that Mr. Kudlow described about in his 2016 book entitled "JFK and the Reagan Revolution: A Secret History of American Prosperity".

Putin has restored Russia's economic health using Kennedy/Reagan tax cut policies. In 2001, a mere 18 months after Putin assumed the mantle of pulling Russia out of the toilet that the Globalist had tried to create, Putin pushed through the Duma an American style flat tax rate giving the Russian citizenry and businesses the lowest tax rates in the world. Such a move by Putin has been hailed by Daniel J. Mitchell, Ph.D, and whose Russia's Christian leadership has declared as a miracle of God.

Russia's economy today:

When you combine the two, this means that every man, woman, and child in the U.S. now owes $933,000 each. Thanks to the Borg, POTUS Trump has a mighty job to reverse their economic lunacy.

Putin has put Russia's flag firmly planted in Traditional Christianity, which is what POTUS Trump is restoring in the U.S. the Christian principles of Home, Family, and Love of Nation. The vile Borg/Globalist/Deep State have tried to use identity politics in hopes of dividing Russia's citizens against each other and their nation -- and has failed thanks to Putin. POTUS Trump has followed in Putin's footsteps returning the power of the government and economic prosperity back to the people where it rightfully belongs. That is why the Borg/Globalist/Deep State are in such a tizzy, they have been shown for what they really are, enemies of both the U.S. and Russia, and mankind.

The Borg/Globalist/Deep State need to understand that their old order is over, that is what was shown at the G7. The populist wave first ignited by Putin, and now championed by Trump, is sweeping across the Western World capturing the attention of freedom-seeking Greece, Hungary, Italy, Austria, Slovenia.


Patrick Armstrong , a day ago

I wouldn't give the credit to Putin: he may present an example, but I don't see any of this as being his doing. It's the failure of the old system that's doing it. In short, the West (like the USSR in the Brezhnev time) just doesn't work. People are coming to realise it.
English Outsider , a day ago
"The populist wave first ignited by Putin, and now championed by Trump, is sweeping across the Western World capturing the attention of freedom-seeking Greece, Hungary, Italy, Austria, Slovenia. "

With great respect, I believe it is not the case that Putin ignited a populist wave. In England I don't think that can be said. That is also so in the US. I find it difficult to believe that what Marine Le Pen said can be taken as evidence that Putin ignited a populist wave in France. In Germany - well, the Colonel's German correspondents could speak on that. I believe it is true most "populist" movements have a more realistic outlook on Russia and many would welcome good relations, but that is common sense rather than an ideological or political stance that owes anything to Putin.

The consciousness that we in the West have lost a good deal by rejecting "Traditional Values" is as far as I can see on the rise. But there's a lot of nonsense talked about traditional values, as if they constituted some rarified value system that we have to painfully re-discover. It is rather the assault on our values by doctrinaire ideologues that is abnormal. Remove that assault and normality returns of itself. It cannot be imposed by the politicians, and in fact in such matters the politicians would do well to simply get out of the way. It's a novel concept today, but in the cases where there are matters of Faith, values, and morality that need a communal approach, we should tell the politicians what we want, rather than allowing politicians, progressive or "populist" or traditional or of any other stripe, to tell us what we ought to want.

It should also be remembered that Faith, values and morality are continually evolving and that that evolution is best kept as far as possible away from the politicians. I think Putin's got the sense to realise that. Most Western politicians haven't. Speaking figuratively, we don't need to import a Putin to run such matters for us. We simply need to get ourselves some half-way decent politicians and thereby run matters for ourselves.

On ecclesiastical matters, the relationship between the Russian establishment and the Orthodox Church is sui generis and can have little relevance to us in the West.

On foreign policy it is true that Putin's approach to foreign policy is very different from the current Western approach. We don't know whether that's merely because he's in a weak defensive position or whether his statements on foreign policy are genuine. But it they're genuine (as I personally believe they are) so what? We shouldn't need a foreign statesman, no matter how personable, to tell us that in the modern world wholesale murder and destabilisation should not be used as a means of pursuing our interests.

J - all this sounds a little hostile to Putin but I can assure you it's not. Putin is a great statesman and the Russians are lucky he came along. To go further than that and to suggest he offers us or ever offered us a solution to our own problems is I believe unrealistic. Our problems can only be solved by us.

DenLilleAbe , a day ago
I strongly disagree. Look what GB has become, and it will only grow worse. Inequality like in the US, homeless and jobless to match, people relying on food banks to get by, and zero hour contracts, healthcare system crumbling and worst of all: inept , arrogant useless politicians, all very wealthy.
Naked unabated capitalism and deregulation at its worst.
The populist parties here on the continent appeals to the lowest denominator, they all need an enemy :immigrants!
Herman Göring explained it well at his trial (Read his comments from the trial)
The Populist have done the same.
English Outsider -> DenLilleAbe , 10 hours ago
"The populist parties here on the continent appeals to the lowest denominator, they all need an enemy :immigrants!"

1. We already have a common enemy. By "we" I mean all of us, immigrants, non-immigrants, and those who don't know who they are. That common enemy is the interest group loosely called the "crony classes" that runs our politics and that is currently engaged in running our respective economies into the ground.

If we squabble among ourselves, as your comment implies we do, then it's divide et impera and we lose.

2. It is a serious mistake to believe that concern over mass immigration implies hostility to immigrants themselves. In fact mass immigration is just as disadvantageous for the immigrants and for the countries they come from as it is for non-immigrants. Would you really like to be a Ukrainian immigrant in Poland? Wouldn't you prefer it if the Ukraine were still a fit place to live in and you could prosper at home? Even more is that the case for the Syrians.

3. It is cant to assert that we must promote mass immigration for humanitarian reasons. The argument does not stand up to a moment's inspection. Such cant aside, you'll find the arguments advanced for mass immigration are economic arguments. We need more health workers and the like. The talk in the most successful of the large Western economies, Germany, is always "We have a declining population. Who will look after us when we're old if we don't import more care workers?"

The use of cheap imported labour to solve problems wealthy Western countries should be able to solve for themselves is not a humanitarian project. As I have been permitted to argue before in these pages, it is simply a modern adaptation of the previous indentured labour system. It is profitable for some in the crony classes. It is not profitable in any sense for the rest of us.

4. If we are truly concerned for the welfare of those who do not live in our countries - and we certainly ought to be - then let's put our hands in our pockets and give them some genuine help! Not fake help that benefits neither them nor us.

In short, DenLilleAbe, we've been sold a pup on mass immigration. One doesn't have to be a "populist" to see through the scam. Even we Deplorables can.

Valissa Rauhallinen -> English Outsider , 5 hours ago
EO, as it is local to you I am curious what your thoughts are about Tommy Robinson and the #FreeTommyRobinson movement. I just learned about him recently and am trying to understand the background. How serious a problem are these immigrant "grooming gangs" and is it true that the UK gov't is downplaying the rape issue out of PC concerns? I was shocked by the media gag on the Robinson story. Seemed like overkill if there is no truth to his allegations against the gov't.
ultramaris -> DenLilleAbe , 14 hours ago
The enemy of the European populists isn't "immigrants". At best, it would be "immigration" - the deregulated chaotic phenomenon. That's what people are against, and rightly so.

But, in fact, wherever populist have actually won elections, the main points of the campaign have been social and economic - see Hungary or Italy. It's the EU and the Brussels-doctrine that have won them the elections. Same for Brexit.

As far I know, the only populist to have put immigration and identitarianism forth was Marine Le Pen, and she failed miserably in the second turn, especially the debate against Macron.

It's, unsurprisingly, the bread and butter that people care most about. The strawman of xenophobia is put forth by the Borg, especially the morally libertine wing, aka the left, to cover for their abandonment of any labour, social or economic difference with the economically liberal wing, aka the right.

Babak Makkinejad -> ultramaris , 9 hours ago
I think European are quite familiar with the history of earlier episodes of Barbarian Invasions in Europe - that many historians blame for the demise of the Roman Empire - and wish to avoid its repetition.
Babak Makkinejad , a day ago
EU is legally predicated on NATO. Unless a country leaves NATO, that country is not Free, as you would say.

Italy?

Will they have the courage and the fortitude to leave the Euro and start printing the Lira again?

I seriously doubt it.

Look at Greecee, they sold their sovereignty for trade beads.

James Thomas -> Babak Makkinejad , a day ago
Babak
The Borg will certainly do everything in its power to stop the disintegration of the Eurozone, but I'm not sure that the Italians will be willing to live with youth unemployment of 40% forever. If either Greece, Italy, or Spain leave the EMU I am confident that they will see an economic upturn within 16 months - then the EMU is doomed.
Sid Finster -> James Thomas , 7 hours ago
Since when did voters start to matter?

Witness the ECB response to Greece's vote on OXI Day. They cut Greek banks off from liquidity until the Greek government capitulated.

The Greek vote was a clear majority with strong turnout to reject the ECB terms. In response, Europe simply took off the mask, so to speak.

Babak Makkinejad -> James Thomas , a day ago
I do not think they have it in them to leave, specially Spain. They would be leaving America, the highest exponent of their civilization. Neither the Flesh nor the Spirit would be so willing.
Sid Finster -> Babak Makkinejad , 7 hours ago
It would require a lot of short and medium term discomfort, and Europe wants nothing more than to go comfortably into that good night.
Babak Makkinejad -> Sid Finster , 6 hours ago
Comfort is one thing. But I think mentally they are not prepared to say "No" to the United States; US enjoys great prestige in Europe and they won't abandon their anchor.

I mean, if they reject US and what she stands for, then what is left in Europe but Christianity?

Pat Lang Mod , a day ago
J- This piece needs citations to support statements by LePen, etc.
smoothieX12 . , 4 hours ago
Putin has restored Russia's economic health using Kennedy/Reagan tax cut policies.

Sorry to disagree in such a dramatic fashion but it was nothing like Kennedy, let alone Reagan. It also had very little to do with taxation it did, however, have everything to do with stopping "privatization" (or robbery) and the start of nationalization of strategic industries. Russia IS NOT the United States in any cultural-economic sense. Not even close.

dilbertdogbert , a day ago
I love the Kendedy Reagan Tax Cuts and how wonderful they were. I kinda remember the Reagan era as that was when my sweet, kind, gentle and very intelligent wife passed all 4 sections of the CPA exam in one sitting and achieved an award for her high score. I also remember how Bill Clinton's tax increase destroyed the American economy. Then came G.W.Bush's tax cuts that saved America. Then that Obama guy raised taxes again and drove America into a Deep Recession. Thank God for Mr. Trump's tax cuts.
Bill Herschel , a day ago
If the trends described are accurate, a big if, then the causes ascribed are only among a set of possible causes. Certainly, you will admit there are others. If the ship of state founders, it may well be because other causes were not sought out diligently enough.

Trump assumes the mantle of Saint Ronald? Thank God.

richardstevenhack , a day ago
I personally find Russia's relapse into Orthodox Christianity and the US rise of fundamentalist Christianity to be appalling. Religion is one of humanity's worst curses.

The only "religions" - more properly described as :"spiritual philosophies" - which I recommend are Chinese Taoism and Zen Buddhism (as opposed to "orthodox" Buddhism.)

Also, I wouldn't be celebrating the "end of the old order" until it actually has ended without destroying everyone in the process.

Babak Makkinejad -> richardstevenhack , a day ago
How debased the message of the Prophets must have become that we should look to Taoist Thought and Zen Budhism for moral and spiritual guidence and succor!

Neither Taoist Thought, nor Budhism in all its forms, nor any of the multitudes of sects and schools of Hinduism ever showed a concern for any thing other than the "salvation" of one single individual. Concern for the other man, actual physical material charity is non existent in them. Billions and billions of Bodhisattvas always supply worthless spiritual charity while neglecting feeding or clothing the wretched human being that needs actual physical help.

Every evil that has afflicted East Asians in historical times may be traced back to this absence of the Prophetc Tradition that began in Western Asia 8600 years ago by the Great Zoroaster.

Your own political position, discernible through your comments, critically is informed by the 3 and a half year long ministry of Jesus, the Blessed Son of Mary.

ultramaris -> Babak Makkinejad , 14 hours ago
Not only that, but in rational terms there is simply no comparison.

To mention but Scholastic thought, that's thousands and thousands of years of philosophy going back to Plato and Aristotle. That's a level of rational thought that goes far beyond pretty much anything produced today and eclipses the platitudes and quizzes of the Zen sayings.

This allure of the exotic religion or spirituality is probably is akin to the phenomenon of telescopic philanthropy described by Dickens.

richardstevenhack -> ultramaris , 8 hours ago
While I don't necessarily agree with every point of either Taoism or Zen, your comment clearly shows a complete lack of comprehension of what Zen "quizzes" are actually about.

Also, Plato lived around 2,400 years ago which is not "thousands and thousands".

Babak Makkinejad -> ultramaris , 9 hours ago
Indeed.

I was thinking the other day that we are now in possession of the technology to destroy, once and for all, the Wheel of Samsara - just explode a few dozen hydrogen bombs in the oceans and the atmosphere of the Earth to make it sterile for ever and ever.

Once all life is extinguished on Earth, surely those souls cannot get reincarnated and the Wheel of Samsara would no longer operate.

The creation of hydrogen bomb, therefore, is of greatest spiritual significance to Hinduism and Buddhism.

I wonder when they will start putting effigies of Edward Teller in Kali Temples - or in Shin-Tao shrines.

Eric Newhill -> Babak Makkinejad , 4 hours ago
Sorry Babak, that won't do it. The departed still have physical bodies - although a much more rarified material (think along the lines of photons are still material to help understand). They are also still very much attached to the physical dimensions because physical matter is merely a form of thought in the universal mind of God and the souls he created and those souls are bound to the physical realm until such time that they have transcended the karma and mentality that brought them into the physical in the first place; which can take many lifetimes and dedication to truth and knowledge. So we can blow up the earth and its inhabitants, toxify it or damage it in other ways and the souls will just build a new earth to inhabit and work through the thoughts and energies that created it. Yes. I have consulted God on this several times.
richardstevenhack -> Babak Makkinejad , 18 hours ago
Debased is how I would describe the prophets, yes. Which is probably why the more ancient civilizations of Asia have rarely had any.
Pat Lang Mod -> richardstevenhack , 18 hours ago
Did you consult with God as to whether the prophets are "debased?"
richardstevenhack -> Pat Lang , 8 hours ago
I consulted with me, who is the only person I consult on such matters (although I do read a fair amount about such matters.)

For example, I know that Saul of Tarsus was a Roman double agent who founded the Christian doctrine and that he was denounced by Jesus' own brother and run out of town under Roman escort to avoid being killed by Jesus' followers.

Jesus (assuming he actually lived) was a devout Jew who had no intention of founding a new religion, still less one that would persecute his own people for two thousand years.

Kind of makes Christianity a bit of a fraud from the get-go.

Babak Makkinejad -> richardstevenhack , 7 hours ago
Yes, indeed.

Any Believer could easily discern in your account that God works in mysterious ways, causing a cynical double agent to become His Instrumentality to alter History and create a new religion.

smoothieX12 . -> richardstevenhack , 3 hours ago
Russia's relapse into Orthodox Christianity

Russia didn't "relapse" into Orthodox Christianity since majority of Russians are either agnostics, atheists or Orthodox mostly in form. Tradition also plays huge role and that is why manifestations of Russian Orthodox aesthetics are so prevalent--it is normal for a nation which grew out of Orthodoxy and minded that even in Soviet times, however unofficially. This is not to mention a major pagan element in Russian culture which is also present. In general, Russian spirituality is much more complex than religiosity as one may observe things during mammoth Immortal Regiment marches.

FarNorthSolitude -> richardstevenhack , 7 hours ago
Science shows that humans are adept at copying and rely on a massive transfer of cultural traditions to define ideas, values, and actions and this shapes the capacity for logic, thought process, and various behaviors. These capacities vary tremendously between cultural traditions. People will faithfully copy errors or obviously unnecessary actions when taught. Given the low iq of the majority, "innovations" introduced are usually wrong or of low quality but again are faithfully copied. Chimps have been shown to be more creative and with better short term memory whereas humans have sacrificed some of that to be able to rapidly copy. Most have little incentive or ability to think about what they have copied and are more robotic than fully human.

I think the case is clear that much of western progress and science has roots in the deep self reflection, critical examination, and mysticism of religious thought about how the world works - cosmologies, theologies, and attempts to understand the workings of nature. Even our self concepts, soul, mind, spirit, self/other as separate from the tribes or natural forces, egoism, etc originate from religious thought and people working to understand the relationship between God and mankind.

But then, of course, it all gets packaged for cultural transmission, doctrines get introduced, and original thinkers need to break through all that. My point is though that some cultural transmissions create a rich soil for thought and innovation, and some make it very difficult.

I believe that ground zero for the west isn't the Greeks. The Greeks copied much from the Persians but like most people claim it as their own, and much of the culture they copied originated in the thought of Zoroaster. He defined a world view of right/wrong, good/evil, where good thoughts, deeds, and actions are important vs. a world in which people are subject to the whim of the gods. Dualism formed a basis that evolved into the objective observation, the dualism of observer/ objective universe of science.

Russia's preservation of Orthodox Christianity, which has a beautiful mystic core, keeps alive the foundation on which the west, and science was built. I can see no way of comparing the Orthodox to fundamental christianity which is shamanistic, and isn't even a relapse - it is the re-emergence of a more primitive and animistic worldview. It is like lumping the stone age and 21st century together and saying they are the same.

Humanism and the enlightenment sprang from a deeply religious society. Unfortunately our culture has devolved away from the enlightenment towards a mushy sentimentalism that elevates and values "feelings" over everything else and debases the rational mind. Liberal new age or fundamentalism - both are tribal and animistic and anti-science as they are at the core anti-religion and both are busy chopping away the very roots that created greatness and neither can sustain it. As a minor example - Russia has as many stem students as the US with half the population

A couple of starting points if interested -

Babak Makkinejad -> FarNorthSolitude , 4 hours ago
Thank you for your kind words about Ancient Persians as well as Zoroaster.

In my opinion, the Zoroastrian religion is the only one extant in which the extinction of Human Race would actually be a disaster for God himself and not just one consequence of his inscrutable will.

Bálint Somkuti , a day ago
Sir,

we in Hungary are under pressure for our "populist tendencies" since. 2010, after ousting our versions of liberals (democrats).

That was way before Mr Trump has even thought of becoming No. 1.

And Mr. Putin only became our """liberator""" after all attempts to reconcile with the Borg EU leadership were in vain,

LeaNder , a day ago
ok, maybe we should link Putin's interview with Austria's public channnel ORF too?

Soaring popularity of right-of-center
forces in several European nations, coupled with Putin's meeting with
Austrian Chancellor Kurz during his visit to Vienna.

http://en.kremlin.ru/events...

LeaNder , a day ago
Paul Robinson offers a comparable topic. Observing the:

International Forum for the Development of Parliamentarism in Moscow. Soft Power

https://irrussianality.word...

The very moment post 1945 Europe chose to embrace the so-called "liberal democracy" as the only viable form of rule it turned into self-perpetuating elitist regime. Logic was impeccable – if the Liberalism as the ideology is the best thing that happened to the Humanity, therefore it must be maintained at all costs. Democratic process presents a danger to the liberalism, because gives a chance for non-liberal political forces to get to the power. Therefore, democracy must be eliminated. In the bourgeois democracies of the West it is ludicrously easy to accomplish – as could be gleamed from the name, only people with money are your lucky ticket into the politics. They are "the people" who rule. And international capital is the biggest Man of them all.

The "so-called liberal democracy" is usually termed neo-liberalism, if used as fighting term. What's the idea behind the we-are-the-people takeover from the right? A more sunny future?

English Outsider -> LeaNder , a day ago
Great quote, LeaNder. You come up with some lovely stuff. But what's all this about a "we-are-the-people takeover from the right?". Left and right have virtually no meaning any more. As for a more sunny future, that's in the lap of the gods. But if we bestir ourselves we might just avoid a more dismal one.
LeaNder -> English Outsider , 6 hours ago
"we-are-the-people takeover from the right?".

Our host, Pat Lang, at one point called it a counterrevolution, makes a lot of sense.

Ingolf Eide -> LeaNder , a day ago
LeaNder, I think you should make it clear that this quote is not from Paul Robinson's article. It's part of a long comment by Lyttenburgh.
LeaNder -> Ingolf Eide , 6 hours ago
It isn't the the third paragraph of Paul Robinson's report? By the way?
LeaNder -> Ingolf Eide , 6 hours ago
Yes, I may have taken David Habakkuk's advice that there is often more wisdom in the comment section beneath the article then in the article itself one step to far? ...

But yes, considering Lyttenbourg, who surfaced here too. ... We seem to be able to cross national frontiers via the arts, or the history of culture, but beyond that for me he had the initial instinctive feel and touch of national pride. You would need to go back to one of TTG's heavily contested contributions to Russia Gate to understand. My struggles should still show there.

[Jun 09, 2018] Hating on Putin by Jewish Owned Media - Update 2 NEWSWEEK, THE ECONOMIST, TIME

Images removed.
Notable quotes:
"... Charles is the founder and editor of Russia Insider . He can be reached at charles@russia-insider.com. Follow him on Twitter and on Steemit . ..."
"... We will gradually be updating this post to include several collages representing about 15 publications. This one includes NEWSWEEK, TIME and THE ECONOMIST. Scroll down to see them all. ..."
Jun 09, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Charles is the founder and editor of Russia Insider . He can be reached at charles@russia-insider.com. Follow him on Twitter and on Steemit .


We will gradually be updating this post to include several collages representing about 15 publications. This one includes NEWSWEEK, TIME and THE ECONOMIST. Scroll down to see them all.


UPDATE 2 , June 7: Newsweek is one of most shameful spreaders of vitriolic Putin hatred. It is a magazine which has gone from ownership by Katherine Graham's (Jewish) Washington Post Group, where it went bust, losing out to its long-time rival TIME, and has since been passed around by a string of shady owners. A Jewish electronics billionaire bought if from The Washington Post for $1.

Meanwhile, its anti-Russian rhetoric has steadily ratcheted up, to the point where it really does seem like it has just become a mouthpiece for US government agencies and / or Neocon zealots who enjoy working themselves into a frenzy over how evil Putin and Russia are.

It is the worst kind of trash journalism, epitomized by truly psychotic Putin haters Anna Nemtsova and Owen Matthews, both Jewish (Nemtsova is married to NY Times correspondent Andrew Higgins, another great spreader of deception about Russia). It's main reason for existence seems to be to churn out a relentless series of hit pieces against the Russian president. It is closely connected with the Daily Beast .


UPDATE 1 , June 2: Here is The Economist , which I personally think is the worst of the lot, because it has successfully cemented a reputation for excellent business coverage, inspiring a lot of trust from people in business who don't follow politics too closely and pretty much believe what they hear from trusted sources. It is definitely Jewish-owned, controlled by the Rothschild family. It's editors and writers are also largely Jewish. Their completely irresponsible and relentless demonization of Putin has been off the charts over the past 15 years.

We know. We watch who is saying what.


ORIGINAL POST , May 18, 2018:

A reader sent in cover collages for a whole bunch of magazines, and we will be publishing them as a series, updated in this post. The first is Time Magazine , a big-time liar when it comes to Russia.

Can Time be described as 'Jewish', in ownership or staff? Let's throw that one out to the comments section. Maybe someone can do some quick research and figure that out. I will update this article if any compelling info materializes, one way or the other.

In my article, It's Time to Drop the Jew Taboo , I argued that the relentless demonization of Putin and Russia is largely a Jewish phenomenon, pushed very hard in Jewish-owned media, and most obsessively by Jewish journalists, and that this peculiarity warrants a balanced, public discussion. I think this reader sought to provide evidence backing up that assertion.

If we, as a society, want to unpack this endemic lying about Russia, we have to be able to discuss who is behind it, and why. This is not a complaint against Jews in general, just the small group of them who dominate our media, and mislead us so outrageously about Russia, and a lot of other things.

Stay tuned for more. We'll gradually update this post until they are all here.

When you see them all in one go, you realize something extraordinary is going on.


NEWSWEEK:

* *


THE ECONOMIST:

* *


TIME MAGAZINE


This post first appeared on Russia Insider

Anyone is free to republish, copy, and redistribute the text in this content (but not the images or videos) in any medium or format, with the right to remix, transform, and build upon it, even commercially, as long as they provide a backlink and credit to Russia Insider . It is not necessary to notify Russia Insider . Licensed Creative Commons


[Jun 09, 2018] Russia s Maddening Patience - Why Doesn t She Strike Back When Attacked

Notable quotes:
"... Orlov is one of our favorite essayists on Russia and all sorts of other things. He moved to the US as a child, and lives in the Boston area. ..."
"... He is one of the better-known thinkers The New Yorker has dubbed 'The Dystopians' in an excellent 2009 profile , along with James Howard Kunstler, another regular contributor to RI (archive) . These theorists believe that modern society is headed for a jarring and painful crack-up. ..."
"... He is best known for his 2011 book comparing Soviet and American collapse (he thinks America's will be worse). He is a prolific author on a wide array of subjects, and you can see his work by searching him on Amazon. ..."
"... He has a large following on the web, and on Patreon, and we urge you to support him there , as Russia Insider does. ..."
"... His current project is organizing the production of affordable house boats for living on. He lives on a boat himself. ..."
"... If you haven't discovered his work yet, please take a look at his archive of articles on RI . They are a real treasure, full of invaluable insight into both the US and Russia and how they are related. ..."
Jun 09, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Russia's Maddening Patience - Why Doesn't She Strike Back When Attacked? Russian behavior often mystifies Westerners - this is an excellent explanation from one of the best analysts out there. Highly recommended. Dmitry Orlov Fri, Jun 1, 2018 | 14,484 368 MORE: Politics Orlov is one of our favorite essayists on Russia and all sorts of other things. He moved to the US as a child, and lives in the Boston area.

He is one of the better-known thinkers The New Yorker has dubbed 'The Dystopians' in an excellent 2009 profile , along with James Howard Kunstler, another regular contributor to RI (archive) . These theorists believe that modern society is headed for a jarring and painful crack-up.

He is best known for his 2011 book comparing Soviet and American collapse (he thinks America's will be worse). He is a prolific author on a wide array of subjects, and you can see his work by searching him on Amazon.

He has a large following on the web, and on Patreon, and we urge you to support him there , as Russia Insider does.

His current project is organizing the production of affordable house boats for living on. He lives on a boat himself.

If you haven't discovered his work yet, please take a look at his archive of articles on RI . They are a real treasure, full of invaluable insight into both the US and Russia and how they are related.


A lot of commentators noticed a curious fact: during the May 9 parade in the Red Square in Moscow, Putin appeared in the presence of Israeli prime minister Netanyahu. Around that same time, Israeli air force was firing rockets at Syrian and Iranian targets in Syria (lots of which the Syrian air defenses shot down) and the Syrians were firing back at Israeli positions on the Golan Heights (which are occupied Syrian territory, so it didn't count as an attack on Israel proper).

Why didn't Russia rise to the defense of its ally Syria? Moreover, there was talk of selling Russia's very powerful S-300 air defense system to Syria, and that offer was subsequently withdrawn. Is this really how an ally behaves?

Or take another example: relations between Russia and the Ukraine has been in a downward spiral ever since the 2014 Kiev putsch which overthrew the constitutional government. There is a festering sore of a military standoff in the Donbass region in eastern Ukraine, a constant drumbeat of Ukrainian provocations against Russia, and Russia has been saddled with economic and political sanctions by the US and the EU supposedly in response to the annexation of Crimea and the unsettled conflict in the Donbass that has claimed some ten thousand lives.

And yet the Ukraine's largest trading partner remains Russia. Not only does Russia continue to trade with the Ukraine, but it has also absorbed an exodus of economic refugees from the collapsed Ukrainian economy which numbers in the millions. Russia has resettled these refugees, allowed them to find work, and is allowing them to send money back to their relatives in the Ukraine. Also, Russia has declined to give political recognition to the two separatist republics in eastern Ukraine.

The only real stand Russia has taken with regard to the Ukraine is in claiming Crimea as its own. But this is more or less cut and dried: Crimea was part of Russia ever since 1783, and the transfer of Crimea to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which occurred under Nikita Khrushchev in 1954, violated the constitution of the USSR that was in effect at the time.

Yet another example: the US, with the European Union acting as its obedient servant, have been imposing various kinds of sanctions on Russia ever since the Magnitsky Act in 2012 which was pushed through by the fantastically corrupt oligarch William Browder. These sanctions have been sometimes somewhat damaging, sometimes helpful (stimulating import replacement within Russia) and sometimes simply annoying. Russia is too big, too important and too powerful for anyone, even an entity as large as the US and the EU combined, to isolate it or to bend it to its will by imposing sanctions.

In some cases, there is a powerful boomerang effect that causes more pain for the sanctioners than the sanctioned. But Russia really hasn't done much in response -- other than working on import replacement and establishing trade relationships with other, friendlier nations. It could have actually hurt the US, for instance, by blocking the sale of titanium parts without which Boeing wouldn't be able to build its planes.

Or it could prohibit the sale of rocket engines to the US, and the US would then be unable to launch satellites. But Russia hasn't done any of that; instead, it just kept repeating that these sanctions are unproductive and unhelpful.

One more: in violation of agreements that Russia and the NATO nations have entered into, NATO has expanded all the way to the Russian border and has recently turned the tiny Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania into a sort of militaristic playpen, holding military exercises right next to the Russian border, stationing thousands of troops there and training them to attack Russia.

Russia has complained about this, but has continued to trade with all of the countries involved. In particular, it has continued to supply the Baltic states with electricity and to use Baltic ports to ship out its products.

When recently Latvia banned the use of Russian in schools (a third of Latvia's population is Russian) and started violating the rights of Lithuanian Russians who tried fighting back against this affront, the Russians took even this blatant act of anti-Russian discrimination in stride. In Latvia, the lights are still on and the loaded Russian freight trains are still rolling in across the border.

"Why is that?" you might ask. "Why such a passive attitude against these numerous sleights, offenses and injuries?" It can't be said that Russia is too big to hurt. The sanctions in 2012 were a piffle, but in 2014 the Russian economy did take a hit (though mostly from lower energy prices, not from sanctions). The ruble lost half its value and Russia's poverty rate crept up. What's going on, then?

To understand that, you have to take a step back and look at the overall context.

• Russia is the largest country in the world in size, but certainly not in population. Its borders are very well defended, but they stretch over 61 thousand kilometers.

• The Russian Federation is Russian in name, but it includes over a hundred different nations, with ethnic Russians making up just over 80%, and with six other nations that are each over a million strong.

• It borders 16 sovereign states -- more than any other country -- including two maritime boundaries (with Japan and the US), and two more internationally unrecognized states (Abkhazia and South Ossetia).

• It has the largest diaspora in the world, with between 20 and 40 million Russians (depending on how you count them) living outside of Russia proper. The largest Russian community overseas is in the US at around 3 million.

• Russian peacekeeping troops have served in numerous countries around Russia itself and across the world -- Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Armenia, Transnistria, Tadjikistan, Bosnia, Kosovo, Angola, Chad, Sierra Leone, Sudan -- and remain instrumental in keeping latent conflicts from escalating to war.

• Russia's huge landmass and enormous wealth in natural resources make it one of the main purveyors of economically essential products to the world, especially oil, gas, uranium and coal, which keep the lights on and the pipes from freezing in dozens of countries. No matter what goes wrong in international relations, it must remain a stable and reliable supplier.

In this environment, countering hostile (and mostly futile) gestures emanating from across the ocean with hostile (and mostly futile) gestures of one's own would be counterproductive: some people would get hurt, and there is some likelihood that they would be Russian.

Thus, part of the winning approach is to just muddle through, maintaining the best relations achievable with as many countries as possible, the neighbors especially, talking to every side in every conflict and trying to defuse it and carefully balancing the disparate interests of all involved. Russia has good relations with both Iran and Saudi Arabia, who are sworn enemies, and with both Syria and Israel, who are shooting at each other.

The other part of the winning approach to confronting an increasingly hostile outside world is to move in the direction of limited autarky; not closing itself off to the world, but taking measured steps to become relatively invulnerable to its vicissitudes. Russia is already self-sufficient in energy, making strides in becoming self-sufficient in food, and the next challenge is to reach self-sufficiency in technology and finance.

Viewed in this context, Russia's seeming failures to act forcefully turn out to be parts of a careful balancing act:

• Israelis bomb Syria while Netanyahu sits at a place of honor during the parade in Moscow. Syria strikes back by bombing its own territory in the Golan Heights. Then Russia decides not to sell the S-300 system to Syria. What just happened? Well, Israel just recognized Victory Day -- May 9th -- as its own national holiday. A third of Israelis are in fact Russian, and a lot of them felt very proud to be Russian that day, and took part in big parades that were broadcast on Russian television. In the face of a rising wave of antisemitism in Europe and with neo-Nazis running amok in the Ukraine, Russia and Israel stand united.

Then there is the fact that Israel doesn't like the fact that there are Iranians in Syria. It certainly has the right to feel that way, given the fact that the Iranians keep talking about how Israel should be destroyed. But Iranian presence in Syria is by invitation, so that's not Russia's concern. Having Israel bomb Syria isn't helpful to Russia, but this wasn't the first time and won't be the last.

Syria successfully shooting down Israeli missiles and then firing on Israelis in the Golan Heights was a new development, and an escalation, and escalations are always bad. Selling the S-300 system to the Syrians would have enabled Syria to shoot down anything in the air over all of Israel, and since they had just escalated, giving them the ability to escalate even further would seem to be wrong.

• The Ukraine continuously provokes Russia and violates the rights of the eight million Russians living there, and yet Russia remains the Ukraine's largest trading partner. What gives? Well, there is the unpleasant fact that the Ukraine is currently ruled by people who are, to use a very specific Russian term, "inadequate." It is an illegal, immensely corrupt regime that is supported by another regime that's across the ocean, which is, by the way, also rather "inadequate" -- headed by a ridiculous buffoon who is in turn being thwarted at every turn by an immensely corrupt "deep state."

But these are temporary facts, and in no way do they override the permanent fact that the Russians and the Ukrainians are essentially the same people (with the exception of a few tribes that mainly inhabit the west of the country that was for centuries a Central European no man's land -- next door to Transylvania, where the vampires come from).

The Russians and the Ukrainians are genetically indistinguishable, and there are numerous nations within Russia that are far more culturally different from the Russians than the Ukrainians. The winning strategy in this case is to avoid hurting the Ukraine, because it is already hurting itself quite enough, and because doing so would in essence just hurt some Russians.

Instead, it makes more sense to simply be patient and wait things out. Eventually, the people in the Ukraine will have had enough and will take matters into their own hands, throw the bums out together with their overseas handlers, and the relationship will eventually become more normal.

• On the Western sanctions , Russia has imposed some counter-sanctions, and they were clever ones. Russia banned various categories of food imports from the EU. This made it possible to ramp up food production within Russia and to move Russia toward self-sufficiency in food. Since within the EU farmers are politically quite powerful, this made US sanctions unpopular in Europe.

Add to this the fact that the US now wants to sanction Russian energy imports in Europe, forcing the Europeans to buy from the US, whose supplies are much more expensive and far less reliable, and you can see why the Europeans have by now had enough of Washington's meddling. Of course, having surrendered much of their sovereignty a long time ago, the Europeans face fantastic difficulties in trying to claw it back, but at least they are starting to think about it.

This is already a win for Russia: it needs independent, sovereign nations for neighbors, not a bunch of Washington's feckless vassals. As far as imposing countersanctions on the US itself, that would just cause some more economic damage without securing any political advantages.

• On NATO encroachment on Russian borders , anti-Russian slights by the Baltic midgets and NATO troops training to "attack Russia" -- well, frankly, the Russians are a little bit insulted, but they are not exactly afraid. Everybody knows that NATO is part of the American defense establishment racket. Its purpose is to steal boatloads of money, not to make weapons that work or to train armies that can fight. There is now quite a bit of NATO armor and manpower prepositioned in the Baltics, but not enough to actually invade Russia in any meaningful way.

And if they ever do, they will get lonely very quickly. You see, NATO armor doesn't fit under most bridges and can't move large distances over rough terrain like Russian armor can. It has to be transported to the field of battle by train or on flatbed trucks over federal highways. Or it has to be shipped in via deepwater ports.

So, all that Russia has to do is take out some bridges and some port facilities by launching rockets from pretty much anywhere, then kettle and destroy the relatively small contingent of invaders, and it will be game over. NATO knows this, and so all of this activity in the Baltics is just a way to funnel some money to the economically anemic and rapidly depopulating Baltic states.

They are suffering already; why hurt them more? As for the rights of the Russians in Latvia, one might think that they don't really mind having them violated -- or they'd be moving to Russia where there is plenty of room for them. They deserve lots of moral support, of course, but it's really their battle, not Russia's.

This doesn't make the most exciting reading in the world, but so be it. People search the internet for stories about dramatic turns of events, mostly because they are bored. It often happens that the most important developments fail to thrill, but this doesn't make them any less important. For example, Russia is reducing its defense spending, because it will soon be fully rearmed.

Can the US and NATO do the same? No! If they ever tried, the American defense establishment would get a new set of congressmen and senators voted in, and the profligate spending would resume forthwith. And so the Russians can just sit calmly, arms folded, and watch the US bankrupt itself.

That will certainly be a dramatic turn of events; you'll just have to wait for it.


This post first appeared on Russia Insider

Anyone is free to republish, copy, and redistribute the text in this content (but not the images or videos) in any medium or format, with the right to remix, transform, and build upon it, even commercially, as long as they provide a backlink and credit to Russia Insider . It is not necessary to notify Russia Insider . Licensed Creative Commons

Hisham Saber John C Carleton 7 days ago ,

The part about ' Israel and Russia ' stand together is wrong.

Putin is just displaying cold, hard, diplomacy, by hosting Netanyahu.

Netanyahu has been to Moscow 8 times in 3 years, obviously pleading and begging, sometimes demanding and shouting matches happen at the Kremlin, with Israeli officials losing it. Putin on the other hand has not visited Israel. So, its a total one-way street. Its Israel that needs , not Russia.

Israel offers Russia nothing at all. Even though a million Israeli's are of Russian origin, Russia has 20 million Muslim citizens. Iran and Russia, on the other hand, have very large trade agreements, in many fields, with Iran being a critical, integral, and indispensable part of the Chinese OR-OB initiative that Russia is also heavily into.

Iran is to become a full member in the many trade and financial organizations of Eurasia/Asia.

Israel, is a tiny apartheid state/outpost that is a warmonger hiding behind the U.S., Britain and France. While being in direct , blatant violation of 70 U.N. Resolutions, far too many conventions and civilized norms. Not exactly the country/outpost that Russia see's a mutually beneficial relationship with.

On the other hand, Russia, along with China and Iran are going to re-build Syria, and also Iraq. Russia stands to gain enormously from this. Russia is slated to build more nuclear reactors for Iran, while rail links and cultural exchanges are growing by leaps and bounds.

Israel offers Russia nothing. Israel shields criminal Russian Jews who looted the Russian people during the 1990's and refuses to hand them over to Russia for justice, or even return the money.

So, I'm afraid your wrong. Putin, his administration and the astute Russian people know who the global troublemakers are. They are the ones pushing for more and more sanctions, war talk and out-right lies and smear against Russia, Putin etc. They are international Jews, who operate from ' think tanks ' , columnists , moguls, government officials etc. Victoria Nuland, the author of the Ukraine debacle is Jewish. The Kiev junta is mostly Jewish.

And I firmly believe that Russians have not forgot about the bloody 20th century they had at the hands of Bolshevik Jews, and then the criminal Jewish vultures who descended on it when it was weak in the 90's.

ColMack Hisham Saber 7 days ago ,

I am reminded of a press conference between Putin and Nuttygetpoo, and Putin quickly said ( As Nutty was having a mental seizure about ancient Persian and Judea)

that happened thousands of years ago it's our job to solve problems of the here and now

[Jun 09, 2018] The Brainwashing of the Israelis by Uri Avnery

Notable quotes:
"... One of the hallmarks of brainwashing is a phenomenon that everyone can notice: the total absence of a second opinion. When a commentator voices the official line on an event, does anyone express an alternative version? Is there a debate between the official spokesman and a contrary commentator? In the democratic media, that would be commonplace. Here it is very, very rare. ..."
"... What can be done to counter such brainwashing? Not much. ..."
"... First of all: there is a vital need for a second voice. Brainwashing can be efficient only when the official voice enjoys a complete monopoly. That was one of the aims of Haolam Hazeh, the weekly which I edited for 40 years. It met every untrue government version with a contrary version. Although our voice was weak, compared to the powerful government machine (even in those days), the very fact that there are two voices, however unequal, prevents a total brainwashing. The citizen hears two versions and wonders "who is right?" ..."
"... The power of the truth against a brainwashing machine is always limited. But in the end, even if it takes time, truth will prevail. It needs courage. ..."
Jun 09, 2018 | original.antiwar.com
It's frightening. Unprincipled psychologists, in the service of a malignant regime, use sophisticated techniques in order to control the mind of a person from afar.

The term "brainwashing" was born in 1950. It is a Chinese word ("xinao", literally wash brain). Originally it served to describe a technique used – so it was claimed – by Chinese masterminds to manipulate the minds of American prisoners in the Korean War. They changed their unconscious mental processes and turned them into agents of sinister forces.

Many books and movies purported to show how this works. For example, the classic film "The Manchurian Candidate" shows how the communists take an American prisoner-of-war in the Korean war, an officer, manipulate his mind and give him an order to kill the US presidential candidate. The American officer does not know that he has been turned unconsciously into a communist agent. He does not remember the order given him under hypnosis and does not know that he acts accordingly.

This pilot is ridiculous, like most of the pseudo-scientific descriptions. In practice, it is much easier to manipulate the minds of people, individuals and collectives.

For example, the Nazi "propaganda". It was invented by Adolf Hitler himself. In his book, Mein Kampf , he describes how, as a soldier on the Western front in WWI, he witnessed the extremely successful British propaganda. The British dropped leaflets over the German trenches and shattered the soldiers' confidence in their leadership.

When Hitler came to power in Germany, he entrusted one of his faithful henchmen, Joseph Goebbels, with the creation of a Ministry of Propaganda. Goebbels turned propaganda into an art form. Among other means he turned all the German media – newspapers and the radio – into government agencies. In German that was called "Gleichschaltung" – connecting all components to one electric line. Thanks to this, Nazi Germany continued fighting long after it was clear that it had lost WWII.

One of the means was the disconnection of the German public from any other source of information. The official propaganda was blared from every medium. Listening to a foreign broadcast was a major crime, punished severely.

Thus it happened that the Germans still believed in their final victory – the Endsieg – even after the Soviets in the East and the Anglo-Saxons in the West had already crossed the borders into Germany.

Does it take a dictatorial regime – Nazi or Communist – to turn the media into a brainwashing machine? Common sense says that this is impossible in a democracy. Common sense is wrong.

It will be remembered that Hitler attained power by democratic means. Even now, fanatical nationalists are winning democratic elections in many countries. All their leaders are busy destroying the courts, stuffing the parliaments with useful idiots and – especially – turning the media into brainwashing instruments. In our country, too.

How is this done? It's quite simple, really: one has to suppress all other voices. One has to make sure that the citizen hears only one voice. One that repeats a few messages over and over, endlessly. This way the lie becomes truth.

In such a situation, the ordinary citizen becomes convinced that the official line is really their own personal opinion. This is an unconscious process. When one tells a citizen that they are brainwashed, they are deeply insulted.

This has been happening in Israel over the last few years. The citizen is not conscious that it is happening. He or she absorbs diverse newspapers, TV programs and radio broadcasts, and sees that all these media are freely arguing with each other and even quarreling with each other. The citizen is not conscious of the fact that on the one critical subject of our life – war and peace – all the media are "connected" to one singular line of brainwashing.

During the last few weeks we have been seeing a perfect example of this mechanism. The events on the Gaza Strip border have activated a mechanism of brainwashing that dictatorial regimes in the world can only envy.

Let's examine ourselves: what have we heard over the radio? What have we seen on TV? What did we read in the papers?

Within a few weeks more than a hundred human beings were shot dead, and many thousands were wounded by live fire. Why?

"We were forced to fire at them because they were storming the border fence". And indeed, did the Gazans themselves not proclaim their will to "return home" – meaning, to return to Israeli territory?

But on May 14, "Black Monday", 63 unarmed demonstrators were shot dead and over 1500 wounded by live fire. Every Israeli knows that this was necessary because the demonstrators stormed the fence and were about to swarm into Israel. Nobody paid attention to the simple fact that there was not a single photo showing such an occurrence. Not even one. In spite of the fact that on both sides of the fence there were hundreds of photographers, including Israeli army photographers, who filmed every single detail. Tens of thousands stormed, and not a single picture?

One should notice the use of the word "terror". It has turned into an adjective attached to everything. There are not just tunnels – they are all always "terror-tunnels". There are "terror-activists". There is "the Hamas terror-regime" and there are "terror-bases". Now there are "terror-kites".

Notice: not just "incendiary kites", or "destruction-kites", only "terror-kites". The same every day in all media. Someone has made the terminology decision. Of course, everyone who has the word "terror" attached to his name is "a son of death", as you say in biblical Hebrew. Another proud term of the brainwashing.

The inhabitants of the Gaza Strip are "terrorists". (In Hebrew, a special term has been invented: "Mekhablim"). All of them? Of course, no question. Especially Hamas members. But Hamas is a political party, which has won democratic elections in all of Palestine. A civilian party which has indeed a military wing. But in our media all party members and supporters are "terrorists", sons of death. Of course.

The use of these terms, hundreds of times every day, clearly constitute brainwashing, without the citizens noticing it. They are getting used to the fact that all Gazans are terrorists, mekhablim. This is a process of dehumanization, the creation of Untermenschen in the Nazi lexicon. Their killing is allowed, even desirable.

In such an atmosphere, even abominable sentences pass unnoticed. For example, this week I heard on one of the TV news programs this sentence from the mouth of a military correspondent, speaking about the coming Gaza demonstration: "Iran wants dead demonstrators, and it seems that they will get them." One has to read this sentence twice to realize what it says: that the Israeli sharpshooters serve Iranian interests.

Or a sentence that is repeated again and again, even by respected commentators: "Iran wants to destroy the State of Israel". I don't know what 80 million Iranians want, nor does the writer. But the sentence itself is ridiculous. Israel is a nuclear power. How does one annihilate a nuclear power (with submarines that can launch nuclear devices in the hour of need). Are the Iranians ready to turn their country – one of the cradles of human civilization – into a graveyard and a desert?

Or a forecast "Friday another violent demonstration will take place". "Violent"? "Another"? There is no argument about the fact that all the demonstrations along the Gaza fence were completely nonviolent. The demonstrators did not shoot one single shot, when thousands of them were wounded by live fire, and more than a hundred killed. Yet the lie passes without comment.

Not a single one of the hundreds of TV news program presenters ever corrects such statements by correspondents. Because the directors, presenters, commentators and correspondents are themselves thoroughly brainwashed. The army spokesman knows the truth, of course, but he is a central cog in the brainwashing machine.

Events reached a climax with the murder of the 21-year-old female paramedic Razan Ashraf al-Najjar, when she was trying to save the life of a wounded demonstrator. The sharpshooter who shot her in the chest saw that she was a medic treating a wounded person. It was a clear war crime.

Was there a public outcry? Did the media demand an investigation? Did the media report this event in their page one headline? Did the Knesset observe a minute of silence? Nothing of the sort. A minor news item in some papers (by no means all). An excellent article by the admirable Amira Hass in Haaretz . And that's that.

A few days passed, and abroad there were outcries. The Argentine soccer team, with the admired Messi, canceled a friendly game against the Israeli team in Jerusalem.

The brainwashers realized that it was impossible not to react. So the army spokesman published a statement saying that an investigation had taken place. What did it discover? Ah, well. It was clearly established that nobody had shot Razan. She was hit by the ricochet of a bullet that had hit the ground far from her. That is such a blatant lie that even the army liar should be ashamed of producing it. It was accepted by the brainwashed public.

One of the hallmarks of brainwashing is a phenomenon that everyone can notice: the total absence of a second opinion. When a commentator voices the official line on an event, does anyone express an alternative version? Is there a debate between the official spokesman and a contrary commentator? In the democratic media, that would be commonplace. Here it is very, very rare.

What can be done to counter such brainwashing? Not much.

First of all: there is a vital need for a second voice. Brainwashing can be efficient only when the official voice enjoys a complete monopoly. That was one of the aims of Haolam Hazeh, the weekly which I edited for 40 years. It met every untrue government version with a contrary version. Although our voice was weak, compared to the powerful government machine (even in those days), the very fact that there are two voices, however unequal, prevents a total brainwashing. The citizen hears two versions and wonders "who is right?"

If all the peace and human rights groups in Israel set up a joint center for information, which will be heard, perhaps the monopoly of official propaganda can be broken. Perhaps.

There is in the country a tiny band of commentators who are not afraid to tell the truth, even when this is considered treason. Gideon Levy, Amira Hass, and a few others. We must ensure that their voice is heard. They must be encouraged.

All the media must be pressured to present a variation of views on matters of war and peace, to let the "internal enemy" be heard, so that the citizen is able to form an opinion of their own.

The foreign media must be allowed free access to the sources of information, even when the foreign media are critical, "hostile" and "anti-Semitic". Friends of Israeli-Palestinian peace abroad must be encouraged to pressure the media in their homelands to publish the truth about what is happening here.

I don't like the word "must". But in this context, no other will do. The power of the truth against a brainwashing machine is always limited. But in the end, even if it takes time, truth will prevail. It needs courage.

The movie The Manchurian Candidate has a surprise ending: in the last minute, instead of killing the presidential candidate, the brainwashed man shoots the communist agent who was supposed to take his place.

Uri Avnery is a peace activist, journalist, writer, and former member of the Israeli Knesset. Read other articles by Uri , or visit Uri's website .

[Jun 06, 2018] Why Foreign Policy Realism Isn't Enough by William S. Smith

Highly recommended!
From comments: "Putin, if people would listen, proposes a model that I find acceptable. Respect for national sovereignty and government institutions. In this model, yes, we would tolerate authoritarian governments as long as they respect the sovereignty and stability of other countries." But the problem with this statement is the dynamics of American Imperialism, which would not tolerate any government which is not a vassal.
Notable quotes:
"... Idealism in foreign policy is, by definition, the pursuit of a dreamy vision of a better world that does not seriously ask whether the ideal is actually compatible with reality. Illusions set idealists up for terrible surprises. Addressing problems through, for example, the lens of Fukuyama-style Hegelian idealism, according to which the world is inexorably progressing toward liberal democratic values, would in today's world be not only absurd but dangerous. ..."
"... When realist thinkers -- from Machiavelli to Kissinger -- prick the bubbles of the dreamers, they incur only wrath. For idealists, it is the height of cynicism and bad manners to point out that cunning and force are what actually dominate world affairs. ..."
"... For Kissinger, peace depends upon "a system of independent states refraining from interference in each other's domestic affairs and checking each other's ambitions through a general equilibrium of power." The Peace of Westphalia and, to some degree, the Congress of Vienna embodied such an arrangement, offering the lesson that balance-of-power theory is indispensable in analyzing world events. ..."
"... However, Kissinger was intellectually astute enough to recognize that, in order to create and maintain this equilibrium of power, something more than a mechanical balance is required: enlightened statesmen. Kissinger states explicitly that balance-of-power "does not in itself secure peace." If world leaders refuse to play by Westphalian rules, the system will break down. He warns of the rise of radical Islamists, for example, who refuse to think in Westphalian terms. ..."
"... Morality in foreign affairs, then, is not found in a set of abstract rules of behavior for nation-states, nor is it found in deploying military power to advance some progressive, idealistic cause. Morality can be found only in the souls of righteous statesmen who, under complex international circumstances, act not out of malice or hatred, nor out of greed or pure self-interest, but who find a path to peace that is compatible not only with the interest of their own nations but that of the others. ..."
"... Just had to correct that one sentence, there. Kissinger had no problem intervening in the affairs of "independent states" that posed little military or political threat to the United States, but perhaps threatened the commercial interests, profits or market share of American companies and capitalists. ..."
"... The record of the foreign policy realists, Republican or Democratic, is drenched in blood, from Afghanistan, Indonesia and Angola to Chile, Nicaragua and Guatemala, not to mention Cambodia from Nixon to Carter to Reagan. And the long-term consequences of their decisions (Iran in 1953, Afghanistan under Carter and Brezinski) can bite the rest of us pretty hard, too. Hell, George H.W. Bush and James Baker brought us the first Iraq War, which should have been left to the Arab League to solve (and, frankly, I give not a whit for the independence of the Emirs of Kuwait). ..."
"... An American imperialist is still, when all is said and done, an American imperialist, and woe be to any small, non-nuclear independent state that gets in the way of said imperialist making the world safe for ExxonMobil, Goldman Sachs or Citibank. ..."
"... What Machiavelli wrote is that statesmen should advocate conventional religious morality as the default position in most circumstances but when faced with an existential emergency they must sacrifice their soul to not do good and use evil but only as an occasion calls for it to protect the nation. ..."
"... Putin, if people would listen, proposes a model that I find acceptable. Respect for national sovereignty and government institutions. In this model, yes, we would tolerate authoritarian governments as long as they respect the sovereignty and stability of other countries. ..."
"... Kissinger is famous for his attachment to the balance of power concept, particularly in relation to the Congress of Vienna, but I always think that he leaves out the main point. The balance of power wasn't an end in itself. It was a means to the end that the European powers wanted to achieve, namely, the restoration of the "ancien régime". The idea of the balance of powers was to prevent the Great Powers getting into fights with each other, leading to mutual destruction, which, indeed, is what ultimately happened in 1914. ..."
"... There are countless examples where realists cherry-picked the facts (variables). ..."
"... Good discussion. Machiavelli's central insight is that a national leader must get their hands dirty, even to the point of committing evil, to protect the nation from disaster, to reform corruption, to remove internal insurrectionists. But using evil for good is limited to only those real (realistic) threats against the nation. According to Machiavelli in his Discourses, glory is reserved for those who are the founders of republics, reformers or religious leaders of a nation, military leaders followed by literature writers and artists who reflect republican virtues. Contra William Smith, foreign policy can not ALWAYS be "just and moral", which is an idealistic a notion. ..."
Jun 06, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Great power competition is everywhere these days -- in Syria, Ukraine, the South China Sea, North Korea. With the rise of China and the rejuvenation of Russian military power, realist thinking is suddenly back in vogue, as it should be.

Idealism in foreign policy is, by definition, the pursuit of a dreamy vision of a better world that does not seriously ask whether the ideal is actually compatible with reality. Illusions set idealists up for terrible surprises. Addressing problems through, for example, the lens of Fukuyama-style Hegelian idealism, according to which the world is inexorably progressing toward liberal democratic values, would in today's world be not only absurd but dangerous. The liberal idea that the UN can foster world order through international institutions is likewise naïve and perilous. Fantasy lands in art and literature can be wonderful divertissements , but using them as the basis for great nation's foreign policy can produce nightmares.

George W. Bush created a dream world in his mind where it seemed plausible for American military power to end "tyranny in our world." Tyranny, as anyone who has not slipped the bonds of reality knows, is rooted in the human soul and cannot be "ended." Tyranny can be checked and mitigated, but only through extraordinary effort and with the help of a rich tradition.

But it is always easier to assign oneself virtue based on self-applauding and unrealistic notions about world peace. When realist thinkers -- from Machiavelli to Kissinger -- prick the bubbles of the dreamers, they incur only wrath. For idealists, it is the height of cynicism and bad manners to point out that cunning and force are what actually dominate world affairs.

Too Many Foreign Policy Double Standards Hurt U.S. Credibility John Bolton: In Search of Carthage

Yet for all their sagacity, realist thinkers are not without their problems either. They tend to deny the moral nature of human beings and the role that this may play in world events. Because they have seen the great danger of moralistic idealism in foreign policy, they sometimes don't think morality should be considered at all. Realist theory has a cold, inhumane quality that makes it inattentive to the moral dimension of human existence.

The failure of realists to incorporate moral considerations into their thinking has made realism unpopular with the American people, who historically believe that their nation's foreign policy should have at least some moral content. They, after all, send their own boys and girls to war, and they would like to think that those sacrifices are not made for some mechanistic balance of power. They know that statesmen must often make cold calculations in the national interest, but surely somewhere in there must be right and wrong, as in all human endeavors.

Because some realists have adopted the philosophically untenable position that morality has no role in world affairs, many Americans have signed on with the moralists' disastrous crusades instead. The realists have the stronger policy case, but they have ceded the moral ground to the idealists.

Ironically, it may be the work of Henry Kissinger that can show realists an intellectual path toward restoring a sense of morality in foreign policy.

For Kissinger, peace depends upon "a system of independent states refraining from interference in each other's domestic affairs and checking each other's ambitions through a general equilibrium of power." The Peace of Westphalia and, to some degree, the Congress of Vienna embodied such an arrangement, offering the lesson that balance-of-power theory is indispensable in analyzing world events.

However, Kissinger was intellectually astute enough to recognize that, in order to create and maintain this equilibrium of power, something more than a mechanical balance is required: enlightened statesmen. Kissinger states explicitly that balance-of-power "does not in itself secure peace." If world leaders refuse to play by Westphalian rules, the system will break down. He warns of the rise of radical Islamists, for example, who refuse to think in Westphalian terms.

Kissinger also says that enlightened leaders must not only recognize the realities of power politics and the hard Machiavellian truths of international competition, but possess a certain moral quality that he calls "restraint." Without a willingness to restrain themselves and to act dispassionately, world leaders will be incapable of building an international order. When facing difficult challenges, enlightened diplomats and statesmen must have the moral courage to accept certain "limits of permissible action." Implicit in Kissinger's thought is that morality, though of a realistic kind, is essential in foreign policy. Only statesmen of a certain temperament and moral character can support the Westphalian model.

Morality in foreign affairs, then, is not found in a set of abstract rules of behavior for nation-states, nor is it found in deploying military power to advance some progressive, idealistic cause. Morality can be found only in the souls of righteous statesmen who, under complex international circumstances, act not out of malice or hatred, nor out of greed or pure self-interest, but who find a path to peace that is compatible not only with the interest of their own nations but that of the others. Such a policy cannot be sketched out in the abstract in advance; it can emerge only through the moral leadership of genuine statesmen who act to find a specific solution in a set of complex, concrete circumstances. This is one of the great lessons of classical political philosophy: justice is not an abstraction but found concretely in the soul of the just man.

The answer to the question of what a just and moral foreign policy might look like is that it's the kind that truly just and moral, but also supremely realistic, statesmen will adopt. That such statesmen are rare is what has caused the great philosophers to lament that only the dead have seen the end of war.

William S. Smith is managing director and research fellow at the Center for the Study of Statesmanship at The Catholic University of America.


Youknowho June 4, 2018 at 11:12 pm

Please. Morality. And Henry Kissinger do not belong in the same sentence even if you have to break the rules of grammar for it.

Bangladesh, East Timor, Chile, are places where people would rise to accuse him if they were not dead thanks to him.

Janwaar Bibi , says: June 5, 2018 at 12:21 am
Implicit in Kissinger's thought is that morality, though of a realistic kind, is essential in foreign policy. Only statesmen of a certain temperament and moral character can support the Westphalian model.

1) In 1971, the government of Pakistan carried out a genocide of its Hindu minority in what is now Bangladesh (then East Pakistan). Somewhere between 1 and 3 million Hindus were killed, and many thousands of Bengali Muslim leaders and intellectuals were murdered by the Pakistani regime.

Kissinger and Nixon supported Yahya Khan's government, and even shipped weapons to Pakistan while the genocide was going on.
From Gary Bass's article in the New Yorker:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/looking-away-from-genocide

While the slaughter in what would soon become an independent Bangladesh was underway, the C.I.A. and State Department conservatively estimated that roughly two hundred thousand people had died (the official Bangladeshi death toll is three million). Some ten million Bengali refugees fled to India, where untold numbers died in miserable conditions in refugee camps. Pakistan was a Cold War ally of the United States, and Richard Nixon and his national-security advisor, Henry Kissinger, resolutely supported its military dictatorship; they refused to impose pressure on Pakistan's generals to forestall further atrocities.

2) Kissinger was one of key organizers of the 1973 coup against the democratically elected Allende government in Chile. When Allende was elected, this moral stalwart told his staff "I don't see any reason why we should stand around and do nothing when a country goes communist because of the irresponsibility of its own people."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

In the first months after the coup d'état, the military killed thousands of Chilean leftists, both real and suspected, or forced their "disappearance". The military imprisoned 40,000 political enemies in the National Stadium of Chile In October 1973, the Chilean songwriter Víctor Jara, and 70 other political killings were perpetrated by the death squad, Caravan of Death (Caravana de la Muerte).

The government arrested some 130,000 people in a three-year period; the dead and disappeared numbered thousands.

****************

Tom Lehrer once said that satire died when Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize. Fortunately William Smith's article about Kissinger's "morality" shows that comedy is not yet dead, even if the comic relief is inadvertent.

cka2nd , says: June 5, 2018 at 12:51 am
For Kissinger, peace depends upon "a system of MAJOR POWERS refraining from interference in each other's domestic affairs and checking each other's ambitions through a general equilibrium of power."

Just had to correct that one sentence, there. Kissinger had no problem intervening in the affairs of "independent states" that posed little military or political threat to the United States, but perhaps threatened the commercial interests, profits or market share of American companies and capitalists.

The record of the foreign policy realists, Republican or Democratic, is drenched in blood, from Afghanistan, Indonesia and Angola to Chile, Nicaragua and Guatemala, not to mention Cambodia from Nixon to Carter to Reagan. And the long-term consequences of their decisions (Iran in 1953, Afghanistan under Carter and Brezinski) can bite the rest of us pretty hard, too. Hell, George H.W. Bush and James Baker brought us the first Iraq War, which should have been left to the Arab League to solve (and, frankly, I give not a whit for the independence of the Emirs of Kuwait).

Would the realists have responded to the 2009 coup in Honduras with any more morality than Hilary Clinton did? Would the economic war upon Venezuela be any less damaging than it has been under Bush II, Obama or Trump? Yes, some of the realists would not have launched the invasion of Iraq, but would they have lifted the sanctions regime on Iraq? Would they have restrained the Saudis in Yemen?

An American imperialist is still, when all is said and done, an American imperialist, and woe be to any small, non-nuclear independent state that gets in the way of said imperialist making the world safe for ExxonMobil, Goldman Sachs or Citibank.

Wayne Lusvardi , says: June 5, 2018 at 1:42 am
Dr. Smith apparently has a misunderstanding about Machiavelli's realism being devoid of morality.

What Machiavelli wrote is that statesmen should advocate conventional religious morality as the default position in most circumstances but when faced with an existential emergency they must sacrifice their soul to not do good and use evil but only as an occasion calls for it to protect the nation.

Example: Truman authorizing the dropping on A-bombs on Japan; Churchill not warning the City of Coventry they were to be bombed by the Luftwaffe in WW II because to warn them would have revealed that the Brits had cracked the German secret codes; and Pres. Reagan freeing American hostages in Iran in exchange for drug money to fund the Contras in Nicaragua.

This is in sharp contrast to statesmen (women) such as Hillary Clinton who used evil gratuitously by taking bribes from foreign nations to fund her foundation; or Pres. Bill Clinton who "wagged the dog" by bombing a drug factory in Sudan to divert attention away from a sex scandal.

Machiavelli was not anti-religious or anti-morality, contrary to pop explanations by liberal media, novels and academics (read Erica Benner's book Machiavelli's Ethics).

S , says: June 5, 2018 at 2:35 am
Henry Kissinger as a moral man? I really wish you had a better example to prove your valid point. The man who was responsible for the murder of millions in Indo China including the bombing of non combatant countries like Laos is hardly qualified to talk about morality of anything.
LouisM , says: June 5, 2018 at 7:30 am
Im not sure morality is even possible. I wonder if it ever was possible.

Everyone in the west is taught the values of multicultural and diversity while the rest of the world is still tribal. It is those tribes who we (US) considers allies which are controlling much of our foreign policy. The other constituency is just as old and its the monied class or the corporations whose only goal is to maintain and grow revenue.

Thank god we have domestic and international law which constrains our foreign policy to moral issues.

Christian Chuba , says: June 5, 2018 at 8:46 am
These terms get murky. Neocons are idealists but most definitely believe in great power competition and dominance. U.S. interests can only be protected if authoritarian regimes are replaced by pro-U.S. Democratic govts which is why we were so aggressive in expanding our influence in Eastern Europe, often through covert means and by force in the M.E. I never had much use for the term 'realism'.

Putin, if people would listen, proposes a model that I find acceptable. Respect for national sovereignty and government institutions. In this model, yes, we would tolerate authoritarian governments as long as they respect the sovereignty and stability of other countries.

We have been brainwashed to consider him an offender in this model because of Ukraine but his response was a minimalist response to a crisis on his border. We go on crusades and experiment on other countries thousands of miles away from our shores.

Digitalwhatsup , says: June 5, 2018 at 8:48 am
Nothing can be said about power. All super powers need to work towards development of People.
Michael Kenny , says: June 5, 2018 at 10:39 am
Kissinger is famous for his attachment to the balance of power concept, particularly in relation to the Congress of Vienna, but I always think that he leaves out the main point. The balance of power wasn't an end in itself. It was a means to the end that the European powers wanted to achieve, namely, the restoration of the "ancien régime". The idea of the balance of powers was to prevent the Great Powers getting into fights with each other, leading to mutual destruction, which, indeed, is what ultimately happened in 1914.

Westphalia was a slightly different situation. A 30-year, on again–off again, triangular German "civil war" between Catholics, Lutherans and Calvinists, with much foreign interference, had reached a stalemate, which, in practice, amounted to a Catholic defeat. The only way out was to let everybody keep what they had and agree not to try to take more. It was forced forbearance rather than balance.

In Europe, at least, peace certainly depends upon "a system of independent states refraining from interference in each other's domestic affairs and checking each other's ambitions through a general equilibrium of power". The European Union is the modern expression of that principle.

That's why Putin's interferences in Ukraine's domestic affairs and his undisguised attempts to destroy the EU have set off alarm bells all across Europe and why US unwillingness to check his ambitions is making the EU the only viable option to ensure peace in Europe.

Donald , says: June 5, 2018 at 11:51 am
Kissinger is an extremely bad person to cite on the subject of morality in a realist foreign policy. John Quincey Adam's would be better. Coincidentally, TAC printed him on this very subject --

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/repository/she-goes-not-abroad-in-search-of-monsters-to-destroy/

Mark Thomason , says: June 5, 2018 at 11:51 am
"Idealism in foreign policy is, by definition, the pursuit of a dreamy vision of a better world"

It need not be that. The "vision thing" that Bush I famously did not do could well be a part of our national interest, one of the things coldly evaluated, and contributing to our strength when done correctly.

cka2nd , says: June 5, 2018 at 1:58 pm
Of Wayne Lusvardi's examples of "existential" emergencies for which evil can be done to "protect the nation," "Truman authorizing the dropping on A-bombs on Japan" is at best debatable given the evidence that the Japanese were willing to surrender as long as they could keep their emperor, and especially to keep the Soviets from declaring war on them, while "Churchill not warning the City of Coventry they were to be bombed by the Luftwaffe in WW II" is legitimate, in my opinion.

But "Reagan freeing American hostages in Iran in exchange for drug money to fund the Contras in Nicaragua" is laughable. American pride may have needed protection from the hostage "crisis," but the American nation certainly did not, as it was not threatened in any way. American foreign policy continued on its way, funding the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, backing the Khmer Rouge against the Vietnamese Stalinists who drove them from power in Cambodia, and buying off Egypt, so you can't even say that America's "standing in the world" particularly suffered from the hostage "crisis."

And as for "Pres. Bill Clinton who 'wagged the dog' by bombing a drug factory in Sudan to divert attention away from a sex scandal," I'll trump that shameful episode with Pres. Ronald Reagan invading Grenada two days after the Beirut barracks bombing.

cka2nd , says: June 5, 2018 at 2:00 pm
I think Christian Chuba is closer to the mark than Michael Kenny when it comes to Putin and Ukraine.
George Hoffman , says: June 5, 2018 at 2:36 pm
Our D.I. In basic training in his frustration to turn raw recruits into soldiers would raise his arms to the sky imploring the aid of the Commander-in-Chief in the heavens and holler, "Dear Lord, give'em books and all they do is eat'em!" That's the way I viewed William Smith's essay on the need for an infusion of a reconstituted morality in our foreign policy.

After basic training, I then served as a medical corpsman in Vietnam, where I was confronted with the grim and brutal reality of that quagmire and learned that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. LBJ would come to regret calling South Vietnam President Ndo Dinh Diem the "Churchill of Asia." There lies the dilemma when idealism confronts reality.

More generally, I disagree with the centrality of the Westphalian concept of what constitutes a nation in the post-modern world. Smith mentions the influence of non-actors such as jihadists to alter our foreign policy goals but overlooks how corporations have also altered that concept with their doctrine of globalization for profits which undercuts national sovereignty established in Westphalia. Smith seems to be wandering between two worlds, "one dead / The other peerless to be born" as Mathew Arnold lamented in his poem "Stanzas from the Grande Chartreuse."

Smith is trying to promote a revisionist history of the last fifty years just as Niall Ferguson did in the first volume of his authorized biography of Henry Kissinger as an idealist. Ferguson notes even Kissinger obviously knew the war was a lost cause after he did two fact-finding tours in South Vietnam early in the war but thought the war was still necessary to prosecute to save a vestige of our credibility as policeman to the world. Ken Burns also attempts a revisionist coup of the Vietnam War when he editorialized in his documentary that our fearless leaders prosecuted that war with the best intentions. So unfortunately, I view this essay as a current trend to to promote revisionism in our history of the last fifty years despite the contrary conclusions of the historical facts.

But as John Adams, a foundering father, once observed "facts are stubborn things."

Sisera , says: June 5, 2018 at 6:43 pm
@Christian Chuba:

I agree-Putin's response to our actions is often not even considered: The biggest flaw with realism that it's like a multivariate experiment -- with everyone having different variables they think to be relevant. For instance, Kissinger thought Vietnam would fall under Chinese influence under Communist NVA, yet he ignored the variable of ethnic rivalries between Chinese and Vietnamese. GWB ignored the variables of Iran -- how it would swoop in and nurture newly Shia Iraq..

There are countless examples where realists cherry-picked the facts (variables).

EliteCommInc. , says: June 5, 2018 at 8:22 pm
Vietnam: perhaps the only conflict fought on half of another of but minor, if any real benefit to the US. That with or without Sec. Kissinger is clear as day. As for quagmires -- it seems that all ward have them. Vietnam was a quagmire because our policy was one of protect and hold as opposed to invade and conquer -- an unfortunate choice. In the world of a realist, we should have killed any and all Vietcong, raced up to Hanoi and ended the matter.

'nough said.

I am not sure many here are reading the same article, because my take is that the author is claiming that Sec Kissinger was a realist -- practical – what needed to be done to accomplish task A -- morality doesn't enter into it. That explains why he found Pres Nixon's faith amusing. So all of the comments bemoaning the Sec lack of moral attend, only confirms the realists perspective.

Nonetheless,

I disagree with your version of the last seventeen years. it has not been orchestrated or led by realists. Quite the opposite. The rhetoric may be couched in all manner of idealism , but so was their application of force.

A realist would not give a lick aboy religious affiliation to the aims of regime chang, cpital market or democracy creation. The onlu factor that would have mattered is who was on board, or not in the way -- all challengers regardless of their faith, political agendas, personality, or concerned about symbols as nonsensical historical artifacts would moved aside by any means necessary. A realist so engaging such large opposition would decided the matter -- to utter destruction to complete compliance – period.

In fact, I will contend that these pseudo realists, were thwarted by their own bouts if idealist moral relativity and were the worst sort for the job at hand.

Buzz , says: June 5, 2018 at 9:30 pm
What a joke of an article, Kissinger as a moralist. He is one of the major war criminals of the second half of the 20th Century. He has the blood of hundreds of thousands if not millions on his hands, as others above have details. And not all foreigners. Lest we forget the part he played in Nixon's great lies about Vietnam that delayed a peace settlement to help Nixon get elected. 30,000 dead Americans later we got pretty much the same settlement. The author of this article has entered into the realm of the absurd.
Miguel , says: June 5, 2018 at 10:27 pm
Wow, I thought I wasn't ever going to read anything on economic war on Venezuela! Finally, even if it is from the comments.

There is an article about not to support/encourage a cup here, but obviously, when it is about the bad economic situation, only the leftish govenrments are blamed, as if Venezuela wasn't thoroughly dependet on debt.

Besides of that, even if that mention weren't thre, I agree and thanks most of the comments in this article.

Wayne Lusvardi , says: June 6, 2018 at 12:18 am
Reply to cka2nd:

Good discussion. Machiavelli's central insight is that a national leader must get their hands dirty, even to the point of committing evil, to protect the nation from disaster, to reform corruption, to remove internal insurrectionists. But using evil for good is limited to only those real (realistic) threats against the nation. According to Machiavelli in his Discourses, glory is reserved for those who are the founders of republics, reformers or religious leaders of a nation, military leaders followed by literature writers and artists who reflect republican virtues. Contra William Smith, foreign policy can not ALWAYS be "just and moral", which is an idealistic a notion.

Bryan Hemming , says: June 6, 2018 at 9:03 am
If, as Samuel Johnson is reputed to have said, "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" then using Kissinger as an example of realism is the last refuge of a fantasist.

[Jun 05, 2018] In Heated Interview, Putin Says Ask The State Department About Soros

Interview on Youtube: PUTIN EXCLUSIVE, FULL & UNEDITED Interview Of Russian President To Austrian TV
Jun 05, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Russian president Vladimir Putin gave a tense interview to Austria's ORF television channel which at times got so heated, he spoke in German to ask host Armin Wolf to let him finish his answers.

The interview was held ahead of Putin's Tuesday meeting with Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz and Vice-Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache during a trip to Vienna, the first since Putin's March inauguration to his second consecutive term (and fourth term in total).

https://www.youtube.com/embed/dc8UHeeYXCs

After several interruptions by Wolf, Putin asked the host to "be patient," before switching to Wolf's mother tongue of German to ask him to put a cork in it. "Seien Sie so nett, lassen Sie mich etwas sagen (Please be so kind as to let me say something)," said Putin.

When the topic of troll farms came up, Putin said that Moscow "has nothing to do" with them, adding that claims by Western media that a single Russian businessman, Yevgeny Prigozhin, was able to influence the US election.

Prigozhin and Putin are associates, however Putin said he has no knowledge of his online activities. The Russian president then brought up George Soros as an example of the double standards being applied to those accused of meddling in foreign affairs.

" There are rumors circulating now that Mr. Soros is planning to make the Euro highly volatile, " Putin said quoted by RT. "Experts are already discussing this. Ask the [US] State Department why he is doing this. The State Department will say that it has nothing to do with them - rather it is Mr. Soros' private affair. With us, it is Mr. Prigozhin's private affair. This is my answer . Are you satisfied with it?"

* * *

MH17

Putin said that Russia has been blocked from participating in the ongoing international investigation into the 2014 downing of flight MH17, which Russia has been recently blamed for. Russian experts "have been denied access to the investigation," said Putin, while Russia's arguments are "not taken into consideration" because nobody "is interested in hearing us out."

Ukraine, meanwhile, has been given access to the probe.

* * *

North Korea

On North Korea, Putin says that the prospect of a full-scale military conflict with Pyonyang would be "dreadful," considering that the two nations are neighbors - and some North Korean nuclear test sites are located near the Russian border.

Although Russia "pins great hopes on the personal meeting between [US] President Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un," the path to the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula is a "two-way road," Putin explained. " If the North Korean leader is backing up his intentions with practical actions, for example, giving up new tests of ballistic missiles, new nuclear tests, the other side should reciprocate in a tangible manner ," he said, calling regular US military drills in the area "counterproductive." - RT

* * *

Crimea

During perhaps the most heated moment in the interview, Putin was asked under what conditions Russia would hand Crimea back to Ukraine, to which the Russian president firmy stated: "There are no such conditions and there can never be."

Crimeans overwhelmingly voted to rejoin Russia in a hotly contested 2014 vote that the West considers illegitimate and rigged. Putin stressed that the annexation happened after an "unconstitutional armed coup" in Kiev, and it was the Crimeans who decided their own fate.

"Crimea gained independence through the free will of the Crimeans, expressed in an open referendum, not as a result of an invasion by Russian forces." -Vladimir Putin

Following the annexation, Putin said "the first thing we did was increase our contingent to guard our Armed Forces, our military facilities, because we immediately saw that they were being threatened," adding that the mostly Russian population in Crimea " sensed danger, when trains started bringing aggressive nationalists there, when buses and personal vehicles were blocked, people naturally wanted to protect themselves. "

"The first thing that occurred was to restore the rights that Ukraine itself had issued by granting Crimea autonomy."

CTacitus Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:27 Permalink

Vote Patrick Little today CA

and f*ck Soros!

lester1 -> CTacitus Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:32 Permalink

Soros working with John Kerry's state Department?? Time for Mike Pompeo to do mass firings !

Shemp 4 Victory -> lester1 Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:36 Permalink

Full 53-minute interview with English subtitles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eombUQtyYiE

gmrpeabody -> Shemp 4 Victory Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:38 Permalink

At least Putin isn't afraid to call a spade a spade... (oh shit, I've stepped in it now)

besnook -> beemasters Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:53 Permalink

watching the full interview. i have noticed that Putin always shifts his posture when he wants to call someone a fucking idiot but restrains himself with more appropriate words. He never gets nervous or rattled...

silver140 -> besnook Tue, 06/05/2018 - 21:26 Permalink

I watched it too. If you compare his patient, methodical answers, based on fact (IMO) to those of every US/EU NATO leader, then you see why he is demonized by the parasitoid corporate fascists and their media. They covet Russia's resources and are desperate to control them, having brought us to the brink of nuclear war in threatening Russian with troops, weapons, war games and missiles on its border. Imagine what would have happened if the geography were the borders of the US and Canada and Mexico.

It is possible that Putin's patience will be taken as weakness, especially in Syria and Ukraine. At some point he will have to give an order to respond militarily, if he doesn't respond, then the parasitoid corporate fascists will commit a full scale military assault in an area of conflict of their choice.

A parasitoid is an organism that lives in close association with its host and at the host's expense, and which sooner or later kills it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitoid

RationalLuddite -> beemasters Tue, 06/05/2018 - 20:18 Permalink

Lord Jacob Rothchild HATES Putin. Just look at the Yukos Oil case in the London courts. Try to find (keeps getting scrubbed) online The Sunday Times article from November 2, 2003 "Rothschild is the New Power Behind Yukos" for a rare glimpse behind the curtain. Vladimir Vladimirovich took back for the state £8,000,000,000 of shares, thought to be the property of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, but actually it emerged were controlled by Lord Rothschild. This is just one Rothchild-1990s-theft-repatriated that we know of. There would be more i suspect.

DingleBarryObummer -> Deep Snorkeler Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:43 Permalink

I will give him this, he named the problem

Putin Blames "Ukrainians Or Jews" For Election Meddling: "Maybe The US Paid Them" | Zero Hedge

valerie24 -> Deep Snorkeler Tue, 06/05/2018 - 20:32 Permalink

The beauty of your comments shows that you are becoming a minority by the day. So many people are waking up to the idiocy of the propaganda spewed by you and your "highly educated" ilk - as I suppose you view yourself.

"America" is an Israeli colony "controlled" by mostly Jewish Zionists

Fixed it for you.

Endgame Napoleon -> Deep Snorkeler Tue, 06/05/2018 - 21:00 Permalink

Russian ads did not have anything to do with the election results. It was a minuscule number of ads, compared to what both of the campaigns ran. We all comment on foreign elections, and I am sure the people in those countries take it with a grain of salt, thinking we do not know what we are talking about.

I Am Jack's Ma -> Deep Snorkeler Tue, 06/05/2018 - 21:16 Permalink

Hey shitty Bukowski:

Take an hour - name every US news media organization which reaches at least 3 million people (a bit under 1% of the population and which are not:

1. owned, or

2. managed, or

3. very disproportionately staffed,

by Jews... who are about 2.5% of the population.

Since Jews are only 2.5% of the population, and 'Jews control the media' is, we are assured, a 'canard,' you should not need the full hour.

Endgame Napoleon -> Solio Tue, 06/05/2018 - 21:10 Permalink

We have a bunch of people in the USA who take quite an interest in saving the global people, while their own country is full of major underemployment, with another housing crisis of an even worse type than the one in 2008 mounting. Despite all of that, these Anericans sink all kinds of money into trying to control what happens in foreign countries. They think they can take on famines and dictators in countries with very different social structures, 8,000 miles away. Some of it is likely naively sincere and arising from a natural interest. It is also a common PR maneuver with money-motivated people, with everyone from rock stars to politicians getting pretty absorbed in what goes on in other countries for whatever reason. It is not without plausibility that a businessperson launched that ad campaign on his own.

Krink26 Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:30 Permalink

God damnit. A Russian is the only adult in the room. Freaking embaressing.

Chupacabra-322 Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:31 Permalink

Smartest thing Putin did was kick Sorros & his NGO's out of Russia.

cankles' server Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:41 Permalink

Putin's interviews with Oliver Stone were good despite Stone being a horrible interviewer.

I enjoyed this documentary of when the US sank a new Russia nuclear sub at the end of Clinton's term.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0485755/?ref_=nv_sr_1

StheNine Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:43 Permalink

I like where this is going. The next few years could be quite interesting.

https://youtu.be/35_ztrvvlik

bh2 Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:48 Permalink

No wonder all US official assets are fully engaged to discourage Americans from listening to what foreign leaders actually say. We are to rely on our apparatchiks -- and their clerical assistants in the ever-trusty US press corp -- to tell us what they are "really" saying and doing.

The key word Putin uttered in this interview is that they do what is pragmatic . His political party specifically eschews any particular ideological basis for policy. That's rather novel, when you think about it. If that attitude were to sweep the world, it seems likely diplomacy would achieve a lot more tangible progress and require a lot less frequent fallback on primitive kinetic "negotiations".

AurorusBorealus -> bh2 Tue, 06/05/2018 - 20:00 Permalink

Yes. This is why Putin is the Otto von Bismarck of our times.

Consuelo Tue, 06/05/2018 - 19:58 Permalink

Say what you will about the man, but he speaks frankly and diplomatically.

Respect.

richsob Tue, 06/05/2018 - 20:11 Permalink

I don't trust Putin on much of anything but I LOVE the way he was handling himself during that interview. Cool as a cucumber. The man deserves credit for being that smooth. He is a master of the art of being interviewed.

VideoEng_NC Tue, 06/05/2018 - 20:21 Permalink

"...he said, calling regular US military drills in the area "counterproductive." - RT "

If this were a boxing match we would call this a solid Ali jab.

Edit: Actually should've said Cassius

JelloBeyonce Tue, 06/05/2018 - 20:34 Permalink

The handful of other
Russian elites present at Davos-among them the oligarchs Boris Berezovsky,
VladimirGusinsky, and MikhailKhodorkovsky, and the politician
Anatoly Chubais-watched in dismay, fearing a Communist takeover,
The American billionaire George Soros feared it too and reportedly tol
the bankers and businessmen over coffee, "Boys, your time is over,"
Chubais recalled, "I saw many of my good friends, presidents of maj
American companies, European companies, who were simply dancing
around Zyuganov, trying to catch his eye, peering at him. These were
the world's most powerful businessmen, with world-famous' names.
who with their entire appearance demonstrated that they were seeking
support of the future president of Russia, because it was clear to everyone
that Zyuganov was going to be the future president of Russia, an
now they needed to build a relationship with him. So, this shook me up!"

It was at this moment, according to Hoffman, that Chubais and the
Russian tycoons "decided on the spot to try and save Boris Yeltsin."
Chubais phoned Moscow to alert others to the situation. He then heI,
a press conference in which he denounced Zyuganov's "classic Cornmunist
lie" and warned that his election would "lead to bloodshed and
civil war." The oligarchs set aside differences and held several private
meetings in Davos hotel rooms, where they strategized over how to
defeat the Zyuganov threat. The result was the "Davos Pact": an agreement
between Chubais and the oligarchs that he would lead the anti-
Communist campaign and they would fund it-and him-generously.
The subsequent months saw a massive media offensive as "money
poured into advertising campaigns, into regional tours, into bribing
journalists"-all supported by the oligarchs (who owned the major TV
stations and newspapers) and orchestrated by Chubais. Yeltsin's subsequent
victory over Zyuganov later that summer changed the course of
Russia and can be traced back in part to the events that took place in
an otherwise sleepy alpine village that February.

Excerpted from "Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making"

FUCK SOROS, FUCK STALIN WANNABE PUTIN, FUCK TRUMP, FUCK CLINTONS, FUCK OBAMA, FUCK MCCAIN, FUCK 'EM ALL.......!

pana Tue, 06/05/2018 - 20:58 Permalink

My most favorite Putin moment. Expression on journalists face at the end is priceless.

"Putin laughs in face of journalists."

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-avast-brwsr001&hsimp=y

Avichi Tue, 06/05/2018 - 21:02 Permalink

At last some one with BALLS to take on the Mother Fucker SOROS , if the Sicilians do not finish the Italian job, Soros mother fucker already has pissed off the Italians.

Here mother fucker SOROS Italian already sent you a ULTIMATUM https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/04/pack-your-bags-italys-new-leaders-tell-

[Jun 04, 2018] Russiagate Manipulating Globalization

Notable quotes:
"... These and other nefarious plans, such as fomenting color revolutions in Russia's near abroad (one recently came to fruition in tiny Armenia), can be all the more easily pursued that the public associates international money laundering and bank fraud with 'Russian oligarchs close to Putin." ..."
"... A comparison of the Russian population's standard of living then and now, as well as the country's defense capabilities compared with eighteen years ago should make clear that Vladimir Putin has been fulfilling his promises to the Russian people, who recently returned him to power for the fourth time. ..."
"... But while it is the largest country in the world, with eleven time zones, its population is relatively small, as is the number of movers and shakers in Moscow. Inevitably, the oligarchs may move in proximity to the Kremlin, making it easy for the US to link Putin with their criminal activities. ..."
"... Deena Stryker is an international expert, author and journalist that has been at the forefront of international politics for over thirty years, exlusively for the online journal " New Eastern Outlook ". https://journal-neo.org/2018/06/01/russiagate-manipulating-globalization/ ..."
Jun 04, 2018 | journal-neo.org

Russiagate has revealed the ease with which globalization's rules can be exploited, overshadowing the world's real political and economic problems. And as long as audiences -- especially in the US -- are obsessed with the pursuit of political 'crimes', war crimes will continue unabated. I'm not saying that this situation was created deliberately, however it is impossible to deny that it has pushed the Iran Nuclear Treaty into a background where National Security Advisor John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo can ensure that it is never revived, making way for eventual 'regime change' in Teheran, and making it less likely that North Korea's young leader will give up the weapons that forced the US to talk to him.

These and other nefarious plans, such as fomenting color revolutions in Russia's near abroad (one recently came to fruition in tiny Armenia), can be all the more easily pursued that the public associates international money laundering and bank fraud with 'Russian oligarchs close to Putin." Americans have never been told that when he came to power in 2000 on the back of state pilfering under 'our man in the Kremlin' Boris Yeltsin, Vladimir Putin made a deal with those who had become 'oligarchs' via those privatizations: "You will be free to continue your games as long as you leave politics up to me."

Vladimir Putin has kept his part of the bargain, bringing Russia up to speed economically and militarily, but here's the thing: while it is the largest country in the world, with eleven time zones, its population is relatively small, as is the ruling coterie. Inevitably, the oligarchs' business may bring them in proximity to the Kremlin, making it easy for the US to link Putin with their criminal activities. A comparison of the Russian population's standard of living then and now, as well as the country's defense capabilities compared with eighteen years ago should make clear that Vladimir Putin has been fulfilling his promises to the Russian people, who recently returned him to power for the fourth time. (After being asked to take over the leadership of the country by an ailing Yeltsin in 1999, he was elected for the first time in 2000.) But while it is the largest country in the world, with eleven time zones, its population is relatively small, as is the number of movers and shakers in Moscow. Inevitably, the oligarchs may move in proximity to the Kremlin, making it easy for the US to link Putin with their criminal activities.

All those Russian names that are (with difficulty) coming out of the mouths of English-only American anchors have nothing to do with the war in Syria or the rebellion in eastern Ukraine, let alone the impending reunification of the Koreas after 65 years of a barbed-wire truce. They have to do with bank fraud and money laundering, which were once the realm of gangsters. What the Muller investigation has revealed is an international 'crime syndicate' whose claim to fame is its association with the President of the United States (and suggestions that is associated with the President of Russia).

But rather than being a strongman who uses his power for personal enrichment, such as for example Panama's President Noriega, Putin's relations with shady oligarchs are probably more like those of the Kennedy brothers, Jack and Robert, with Meyer Lansky and his cohorts based in pre-Castro Havana. (When, fifty years later, I read about the mob's 'interest' in the Cuban revolution, I realized with a shudder that they were lurking in Havana when I arrived there a week after the Kennedy assassination.)

Russiagate shows how far the US has regressed since the days of Camelot.

Deena Stryker is an international expert, author and journalist that has been at the forefront of international politics for over thirty years, exlusively for the online journal " New Eastern Outlook ".
https://journal-neo.org/2018/06/01/russiagate-manipulating-globalization/

[May 27, 2018] Northwestern University roundtable discusses regime change in Russia Defend Democracy Press

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... By Marcus Day and Kristina Betinis ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... The panel showcased the institute's first "Distinguished Visitor," Strobe Talbott, former deputy secretary of state in the Clinton administration, president of the Brookings Institution think tank from 2002 to 2017, and a key architect of US imperialist strategy in relation to the breakup of the USSR in the 1990s. ..."
"... obe Talbott outlined three main challenges faced by the current Russian government: its internal problems, including economic and demographic decline; the "threat from the Islamic world, it's the southern belly and it's very vulnerable;" and finally, potential conflict with China over access to natural resources. "They know Russia has resource wealth and human poverty that could spell trouble down the line," Talbott said. ..."
"... Read also: Is (or can be) the western Far (Hard) Right a friend of Russia? The Ukrainian Test ..."
"... To the question, "Do we have another Cold War?" Talbott answered, "Yes, we've got a Cold War. It's the old McCarthy line: If it quacks like a duck, and it walks like a duck, it's a Cold War." ..."
"... Historian John Bushnell raised only one objection against the panel's official State Department line. Referring to the 2014 US-German-led coup in Ukraine, he said, "The Russians, I think with some justification, point out that John McCain didn't need to show up in Kiev. There was no reason for a top State Department official [Victoria Nuland] to be caught giving advice, deciding who would sit in the next Ukrainian cabinet. There clearly was a direct American intervention in Ukrainian politics. ..."
"... Kelly emphasized at different points in the discussion that there is no plan for succession in Russia after Putin. He said, "There really is no succession plan. And in many ways, that is absolutely terrifying. Because if everything does depend on one man, do we really want to push Russia to the edge with more sanctions, and try and undermine their regime? Because if there is no successor, then you have a similar situation without any kind of management of the transition that we had in '91, with a country that has thousands of nuclear weapons and chaos." ..."
"... The WSWS wrote in 2016 that the establishment of the Buffett Institute at Northwestern -- with the assistance of a $101 million donation from Roberta Buffett Elliott, the sister of billionaire Warren Buffett -- was part of an international effort of the capitalist elite to transform leading universities into ideological centers of imperialist military strategy. ..."
www.defenddemocracy.press
By Marcus Day and Kristina Betinis
25 May 2018

The Northwestern University Buffett Institute for Global Studies hosted a roundtable event in the Chicago area on May 23 titled, "The Kremlin's Global Reach," moderated by Medill journalism professor and Washington Post veteran Peter Slevin. The panel showcased the institute's first "Distinguished Visitor," Strobe Talbott, former deputy secretary of state in the Clinton administration, president of the Brookings Institution think tank from 2002 to 2017, and a key architect of US imperialist strategy in relation to the breakup of the USSR in the 1990s.

Also present were political science professor Jordan Gans-Morse, public opinion pollster Dina Smeltz, lecturer and former US ambassador to Georgia Ian Kelly and historian John Bushnell.

The event took place amid a steady escalation of US militarism against Syria, Iran and Russia. Just two days earlier, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered an ultimatum to Iran demanding a capitulation to the US in the face of additional sanctions. This followed on the heels of the Trump administration's scrapping of a nuclear agreement reached in 2015 between Iran and the P5+1 group, the US, UK, France, Germany, China and Russia. Earlier this month, the US relaunched a naval force, the Second Fleet, in the North Atlantic in preparation for military confrontation with Russia.

The political perspective of the event was clear from Slevin's opening questions: "What is to be done? How do you solve a problem like Vladimir Putin?"

Str obe Talbott outlined three main challenges faced by the current Russian government: its internal problems, including economic and demographic decline; the "threat from the Islamic world, it's the southern belly and it's very vulnerable;" and finally, potential conflict with China over access to natural resources. "They know Russia has resource wealth and human poverty that could spell trouble down the line," Talbott said.

Read also: Is (or can be) the western Far (Hard) Right a friend of Russia? The Ukrainian Test

To the question, "Do we have another Cold War?" Talbott answered, "Yes, we've got a Cold War. It's the old McCarthy line: If it quacks like a duck, and it walks like a duck, it's a Cold War."

In line with this reactionary narrative, Talbott presented the conflict between the US and Russia as one between "democracy" and "tyranny," while some of the other panelists admitted that is not the way the conflict is viewed in Russia and Europe.

Later, Talbott emphasized the challenge to US hegemony posed by the Balkans, particularly Serbia, citing their cultural and religious affinities with Russia. In 2015, Montenegro entered NATO.

Historian John Bushnell raised only one objection against the panel's official State Department line. Referring to the 2014 US-German-led coup in Ukraine, he said, "The Russians, I think with some justification, point out that John McCain didn't need to show up in Kiev. There was no reason for a top State Department official [Victoria Nuland] to be caught giving advice, deciding who would sit in the next Ukrainian cabinet. There clearly was a direct American intervention in Ukrainian politics. "

A number of the panelists interrupted at this point, some laughing nervously, others strongly protesting.

Slevin, in concluding the discussion, posed the question of regime change in Russia, stating, "How does this end? How does Putin fall? Retire? Get replaced? What is the fate of Vladimir Putin?"

The main obstacle to regime change in Russia was, according to the panelists, the chaos it would inevitably unleash. Kelly emphasized at different points in the discussion that there is no plan for succession in Russia after Putin. He said, "There really is no succession plan. And in many ways, that is absolutely terrifying. Because if everything does depend on one man, do we really want to push Russia to the edge with more sanctions, and try and undermine their regime? Because if there is no successor, then you have a similar situation without any kind of management of the transition that we had in '91, with a country that has thousands of nuclear weapons and chaos."

Read also: Breakdown in North Korea Talks Sounds Alarms on Capitol Hill

However, expressing the position of significant sections of the Democratic Party, aligned with the US state-military-intelligence apparatus, Talbott concluded, "Putin has presided over Russia in a way that is very, very much like the Soviet Union. That didn't work. This won't work. He will be an aberration. It would also help if we had a different president in the United States."

A notable feature of the event was its casual militarism. In introducing himself, Kelly noted that the US has recently provided both Georgia and Ukraine with Javelin anti-tank weaponry.

In line with the propaganda pumped out about the US media and political establishment, the panel speakers presented a picture of reality turned upside down: Russia was presented as an aggressive, expansionist power, and a growing threat to the American way of life. In fact, it is the US government and its imperialist allies which have increasingly encircled Russia via NATO expansion, crippled its economy with sanctions and sought to provoke a military conflict.

As US Defense Secretary James Mattis noted in releasing the Pentagon's new National Security Strategy, "Great power competition -- not terrorism -- is now the primary focus of US national security."

Before the audience assembled by this national security institute, which appeared to include only a handful of undergraduate students, these leading political figures spoke more bluntly about imperialist foreign policy than they would normally do on national television or in supposedly democratic arenas like the US Congress.

The WSWS wrote in 2016 that the establishment of the Buffett Institute at Northwestern -- with the assistance of a $101 million donation from Roberta Buffett Elliott, the sister of billionaire Warren Buffett -- was part of an international effort of the capitalist elite to transform leading universities into ideological centers of imperialist military strategy.

Read also: Exxon Mobil Exits Joint Oil Ventures With Russia Due to Sanctions

At the time of the Buffett Institute's founding, university students and faculty protested the appointment as its head of former the US commander in Afghanistan, Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry, whose qualifications were based on military rank and bellicose politics, rather than any academic credentials. Northwestern faculty members charged that he "advocates instrumentalizing the humanities and social sciences research to advance US soft power."

The International Youth and Students for Social Equality are leading the opposition internationally to the transformation of colleges and universities into think tanks for imperialism and militarism. Contact the Socialist Equality Party to start an IYSSE chapter on your campus.

SOURCE www.wsws.org

[May 23, 2018] If the Trump-Russia set up began in spring 2016 or earlier, presumably it was undertaken on the assumption that HRC would win the election. (I say "presumably" because you never can tell..) If so, then the operation would have been an MI6 / Ukrainian / CIA coordinated op intended to frame Putin, not Trump

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Could it be that Mueller is there for some other reason? we know there are special interests that the democrats represent and since the US federal system doesn't really lend itself to any sort of coalition govt of any form, that the investigation is cover for the those interests being represented in some fashion the form doesn't allow for. ..."
"... Presumably the op would have allowed HRC to undertake just the sort of actions against Russia that, after Trump's election, have been undertaken in any case. The difference being that there is at least some reason to bet that HRC along with Obama knew something of the operation, and that in conjunction with UK/Ukrainian interests was planning her early foreign policy directives. The election of Trump on this reading was accidental to the op as originally designed. Is this right? ..."
May 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

heath | May 22, 2018 11:28:05 AM | 8

Could it be that Mueller is there for some other reason? we know there are special interests that the democrats represent and since the US federal system doesn't really lend itself to any sort of coalition govt of any form, that the investigation is cover for the those interests being represented in some fashion the form doesn't allow for.

fastfreddy , May 22, 2018 11:46:23 AM | 11

Heath,

That's what I'm thinking. It is apparent the "The Mueller Investigation" is - firstly - a major distraction. It is also apparent that it doesn't make any headway, lead to any conclusions or indictments of any big fish.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/mueller-indictments-grand-jury

WJ , May 22, 2018 1:00:41 PM | 17
Re: Mueller. If the Trump-Russia set up began in spring 2016 or earlier, presumably it was undertaken on the assumption that HRC would win the election. (I say "presumably" because you never can tell..) If so, then the operation would have been an MI6 / Ukrainian / CIA coordinated op intended to frame Putin, not Trump.

Presumably the op would have allowed HRC to undertake just the sort of actions against Russia that, after Trump's election, have been undertaken in any case. The difference being that there is at least some reason to bet that HRC along with Obama knew something of the operation, and that in conjunction with UK/Ukrainian interests was planning her early foreign policy directives. The election of Trump on this reading was accidental to the op as originally designed. Is this right?

WJ , May 22, 2018 1:08:52 PM | 18
The other possibility being that the operation was demanded by Trump winning the Republican primary, as a kind of insurance policy. He being the only candidate who could not be predictably counted on to follow the anti-Putin hard liners in the Military-intelligence community, something needed to be done to ensure that, on the off chance that he won, the anti-Russian measures already being planned for would not be affected.

So it is perhaps unlikely that this op would have been necessary had, say, Jeb Bush or Rubio won the primary.

What made it necessary was the unknown quantity that Trump represented. This would mean, again, that the op was not so much partisan (Dem v Rep) as it was about ensuring continuity of military-intelligence decisions in face of relatively unknown entity. Had Bush won the R nomination, there would have been no op because the Bush family like the Clintons are down for whatever.

BraveNewWorld , May 22, 2018 1:25:22 PM | 20
If they shutdown Mueller you can expect a sudden gush of leaks like some one took a shot gun to a fire hose.

[May 20, 2018] Making sense of Russian political ambiguities by The Saker

Looks like Putin does not see alternative to neoliberalism... Also he need to provide for Russia a time to get from knees it was put by yeltzin regime. Russia is still very week economically in comparison with the alliance of US and EU. It does not have China advantage of hosting manufacturing of many high tech products.
Notable quotes:
"... to me this does strongly suggest that Putin is on the retreat, that he has made a major mistake and that the Empire has scored a major victory. ..."
May 20, 2018 | www.unz.com

Meh. I am personally unconvinced. How can Putin say that he wants serious reforms while keeping the exact same type of people in command? If indeed the Medvedev government did such a great job, then why is there any need for such major reforms? If Putin's power base is indeed, as I believe it to be, in the people, then why is he trying to appease the financial elites by catering to their interests and agenda? Most crucially, how can Russia free herself from the financial and economic grip of the Empire when the Empire's 5 th column agents are (re-)appointed to key positions? And in all of Russia was there really nobody more qualified than Mutko or Kudrin to appoint to these positions?

Of course, there always this "Putin knows something you don't" but I have always had a problem with that kind of logic which is essentially an open-ended universal cop-out. I hope that I am wrong, but to me this does strongly suggest that Putin is on the retreat, that he has made a major mistake and that the Empire has scored a major victory. And I will gladly admit that I have yet to hear an explanation which would explain this, never mind offer one of my own.

On the external front, has Russia caved in to Israeli pressure? Ruslan Ostashko offers a very good analysis of why this is hardly the case: (I don't necessarily agree with his every conclusion, but he does make a very good case:

Yes, Netanyahu *did* with his repeated strikes on Syria, thumb his nose at Putin (that famous Israeli chutzpah at work for you!), and yes, Putin wining and dining Netanyahu was a painful sight and a PR-disaster. But on substance, did Israel get Russia to "betray Iran"? No, and not because the Russians are so heroically principled, but because Israel really has nothing to offer Russia. All Israel has is a powerful pro-Israel lobby inside Russia, that is true. But the more they use that lobby the more visible it becomes, the more questions at least Eurasian Sovereignists will ask.

The Israelis sure don't want to give the impression that the run Russia the way they run the US, and Netanyahu's reception in the Kremlin recently has already raised a lot of eyebrows and the impression that Putin caved in to the demands of this arrogant bastard are not helping Putin, to put it mildly. A lot of Russian analysts (Viktor Baranets, Maksim Shevchenko, Leonid Ivashev) wonder what kind of arguments Netanyahu used with Putin, and the list of possibilities is an outright uninspiring one.

Part five – another truism: there is a difference between excellent, good, average, bad and terrible

Even if the situation in Russia has changed for the worse, this is hardly a reason to engage in the usual "Putin sold out" hysteria or to declare that "Russia caved in". Even when things are bad, there is still a huge difference between bad and worse. As of right now, Putin is not only the best possible person to be the President of Russia, Russia also continues to be the objective leader of the resistance to the Empire. Again, the black-and-white "Hollywood" type of mindset entirely misses the dynamic nature of what is going on. For example, it is quite clear to me that a new type of Russian opposition is slowly forming. Well, it always existed, really – I am talking about people who supported Putin and the Russian foreign policy and who disliked Medvedev and the Russian internal policies. Now the voice of those who say that Putin is way too soft in his stance towards the Empire will only get stronger. As will the voices of those who speak of a truly toxic degree of nepotism and patronage in the Kremlin (again, Mutko being the perfect example). When such accusations came from rabid pro-western liberals, they had very little traction, but when they come from patriotic and even nationalist politicians (Nikolai Starikov for example) they start taking on a different dimension.

For example, while the court jester Zhirinovskii and his LDPR party loyally supported Medvedev, the Communist and the Just Russia parties did not. Unless the political tension around figures like Kudrin and Medvedev is somehow resolved (maybe a timely scandal?), we might witness the growth of a real opposition movement in Russia, and not one run by the Empire. It will be interesting to see if Putin's personal ratings will begin to go down and what he will have to do in order to react to the emergence of such a real opposition.

Much will depend on how the Russian economy will perform. If, courtesy of Trump's megalomaniacal policies towards Iran and the EU, Russia's economy receives a massive injection of funds (via high energy prices), then things will probably stabilize. But if the European leaders meekly cave in and join the sanctions against Iran and if the US succeeds in imposing even further sanctions on Russia, then the Medvedev government will face a serious crisis and the revival of the Russian economy promised by Putin will end up in an embarrassing failure and things could also go from bad to even worse.

... ... ...

For Hezbollah, Iran or Russia to defeat Israel, the US or the entire Empire, there is no need to plant a flag on the enemy's main symbolic building like what Soviet soldiers did in Germany. All they need to do to win is simply to survive because the other's sides survival is predicated upon their elimination, it's really that simple. Israel cannot claim victory as long as Hezbollah exists, the US cannot claim world Hegemony if Iran openly defies it, and the AngloZionist Empire cannot clain world hegemony over the our planet as long as the Russian civilizational realm openly challenges it. So while all the talk about the Iranians wanting to " wipe Israel off the map " is just a typical ziomedia invention, it is true that by their very existence Hezbollah, Iran and Russia do represent an existential threat to Israel, the US and the Empire .

This is the biggest and the fatal weakness of the AngloZionist Empire: its survival depends on the colonization or destruction of every other country out there. Every independent country, whether big and powerful, or small and weak, represents an unacceptable challenge to the hegemony of the "indispensable nation" and the "chosen people", which now try to rule over us all. This might well be the ultimate example of Hegelian dialectics at work in geopolitics: an Empire whose power generates it's own demise. Many empires have come and gone in history, but the globalized world we live in, this dialectical contradiction is tremendously potentialized by the finite conditions in which empires have to operate.

... ... ...

Right now Putin still has a lot of "credibility capital" left in spite of his recent mistakes. However, Putin recent decisions have raised a lot of unpleasant questions which must be answered and will so in time. In the meantime, as they say in the US, " hope for the best, prepare for the worst, and settle for anything in the middle ". The Scripture also warns us not to make idols of leaders: " Trust not in princes, nor in the children of men, in whom there is no safety " (Ps 145:3 LXX). The worldly evil we are fighting, today in the shape of the AngloZionist Empire, is but a manifestation of a much deeper, spiritual evil: " For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places " (Eph. 6:12). The young men and women from the Shia movement Amal got it right when they chose the name "Party of God" for their movement when they created Hezbollah in 1985. And Iran was right when it became an Islamic Republic: if we want to defeat the Empire we need to always let spiritual matters and moral crieria remain above any of our "pragmatic" worldly political considerations or national/ethnic loyalties: that is how we can defeat those who place a dollar value on absolutely everything they see in their narrow materialistic worldview.


Robert Magill , May 17, 2018 at 9:54 am GMT

A truly amazing article and the most amazing thing of all is the total lack of even one paragraph of the existence of China. This article could have been written, word for word, by a defender of the Empire and the China omission would have been identical.

The Key player on the world scene manages to wear the clock of invisibility like the Shadow of old time radio and movies. Quite a feat!
robertmagill.wordpress.com

m___ , May 17, 2018 at 10:12 am GMT

Second, each process carries within itself the seeds of its own contradiction. This is what makes processes dynamic.

"what makes processes dynamic", could it be "more then just linear"? Referring to changes of direction regardless of interaction(group dynamics) with other processes. Example: the Roman Empire process, growing then imploding?

Discard as pendantic in case.

Randal , May 17, 2018 at 3:00 pm GMT

Even the Pantsir which was recently destroyed by the Israelis (with the usual pro-Israeli PR campaign) was not even on combat alert: the unit was not even camouflaged and its crew was standing around and smoking. The Israelis are masters at making this look all very impressive and heroic, but in military terms, this is nonsense: they clearly hit a unit which was not even part of the action (whatever that "action" was).

Not sure how an AD unit can be "not part of the action" anywhere in any meaningful sense in the midst of an ongoing surge of strikes within a strategic campaign of air attacks such as Israel is waging against Syria.

Without knowing the context (how long had it been stationary and out of ammo/action, as it reportedly was at the time of the strike, and what was the context for the Israelis getting a missile through to it when it should have been covered by other operational defences), it's hard to know how much its loss should be put down to Syrian fault, and how much to Israeli/US technical competence or just to the vagaries of war.

But it certainly doesn't look good and that's of course why the Israelis are so keen to publicise it.

As for the Saker piece, as usual lots of good points and some not so good, but that's about all one can expect on such complex topics. Imo he's rather over-stating the case in excusing the Russian failure to halt the ongoing Israeli assault on Syria. Yes, Russia has no formal alliance with Syria or Iran committing it to defend them (and by the way these are attacks on Syria not just Iran, though occasionally they hit Iranian forces within Syria and allied with Syria – the claims of targeting just Iranian forces are Israeli propaganda to create a seeming pretext good enough for the pro-Israeli media in the US sphere). But to say there is no moral onus on Russia whatsoever to do so is simply overstating it – Iranians, Syrians and Russians are fighting side by side in Syria and that in itself creates some moral pressure not to stand by and watch your allies get butchered with impunity when you can do something about it.

But from a purely pragmatic point of view, failing to halt the Israeli attacks is damaging to Russia, on at least two counts. First, it unavoidably creates a perception of weakness and/or betrayal, and of unreliability and two-facedness. In a more concrete sense, though, the simple fact is that Iranian, Syrian and Russian interests are in fact fundamentally aligned in Syria and diametrically opposed to the Israeli objective, on the core issue, which is the survival and stabilisation of the Syrian state. Israeli impunity and the level of attacks it is now carrying out are incompatible with the goal of stabilising Syria, and will have to be stopped at some time if that goal is to be achieved.

If the Russian government thinks that by appeasing the Israelis it can somehow hope that they might be persuaded to slow down or halt the attacks, perhaps if the Iranians pull out, then the Russian government is profoundly naïve. Claims that the strikes are motivated by Iranian presence are pretexts, not reasons. If that pretext goes, another will be found. The Israeli goal remains to destroy the Syrian state, destroy Hezbollah and destroy Iran as a regional rival. Israel does not need to do these things – claims that it is under serious threat are outright propaganda lies. It wants to do them, in order to gain in regional power over its rivals and increase further its impunity to continue and escalate its ongoing settler colonisation programs enabled by the US.

Those objectives are important enough that it isn't going to halt in pursuing them as a favour to Russia, no matter how meek and submissive the Russian government acts, but they are not important enough for Israel to face open conflict with a major power for them. Israel does these things because it can. When it is forcefully told that it can no longer do them, it will stop doing them.

One can certainly argue (and I have done so in the past) that the time isn't right for Russia to put a halt to Israeli attempts to destabilise the Syria government, though that argument grows increasingly threadbare. One cannot argue credibly, I think, that it will not be necessary to do so at some point soon.

ohmy , May 17, 2018 at 4:07 pm GMT
This is a very good interpretation of the recent events which have confused us all. Personally I think any and, all deals Putin has made with the Western Zionists have a short shelf life as, there seems to be no contract the West will honor short of complete capitulation.

Patience is a good thing here and,, Putin knows in the end Russia is the prize. So, I believe right now he is smart to play short ball with Washington and, Tel Aviv. There's a level of immaturity in guys like Netanyahu and, Trump. Let me just say, they have their egos to protect.
Saker, what do you know about AI as it relates to Tyler, anything? Is this a topic which can excite from you an article or, two?

Mega SCI dump , May 17, 2018 at 4:33 pm GMT
"the "New Russia" (as I like to call it) is not based on anything other than a Constitution written mostly by US advisors"

That's a bit harsh. Judging by what the Russian command structure has been seen to say and do, they are evidently based on rights and rule of law, not on the perverted US model but on black-letter customary and conventional international law. Russia dominates US performance in terms of human rights,

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Indicators/Pages/HRIndicatorsIndex.aspx

They took over from France as the world's most articulate advocate of rule of law, and did it better. In Syria they stressed pacific resolution of disputes, notably by brokering Syrian chemical weapons disarmament through OPCW. They also press-ganged a military staff committee and enforced UN Charter Article 47 at gunpoint, using all the megatonnage needed. Now they're the world's policeman, and they're not USA-style asshole cops. They're taking the role of international civil servants in the UN Charter's sense. That may be one reason why they're not consistently kicking US ass, as we would wish: Peace is the law. Friendly relations – it's the law, A/RES/25/2625.

Not that they're perfect examples of rights or law – the indicators show that in the specific respect of invitations to special procedures, they're about as bad as the USA, and that's pretty bad. And your point about double standards on Israeli impunity is very important. But their opposition to the West is not general, but meticulously grounded in law. Recall that they justified even a vital interest, Crimean accession, in terms of the Kosovo precedent set out by the ICJ.

Per/Norway , May 17, 2018 at 7:53 pm GMT
@Randal

the pantsir was being reloaded.. no rockets in the tubes, maybe that is how it was not part of the action;)
weapons without ammo cant do their intended operations as far as i know,,

Randal , May 17, 2018 at 8:56 pm GMT
@Per/Norway

Being out of ammo doesn't mean being "not part of the action". It means you should be either be being reloaded or getting under cover to reload, or be covered by other systems, or both.

Were the autocannons out of ammo as well? If it was running low on ammo shortly before, why wasn't it already on the move towards cover, since the S1 can reportedly fire on the move? If it was under such rapid and sustained attack that its ammo was exhausted in a saturation attack (and that of its covering systems as well, bearing in mind it was reportedly located at a major airbase), and it had no time to move or be reloaded before it was hit, then it absolutely was not "not part of the action".

I take no joy in pointing it out, but this was a clear defeat for the Syrian AD systems, however you explain it. It's not the end of the world – losses are inevitable in combat. Lessons can be learned. But it can't be airily dismissed as "not part of the action".

Malcolm Tucker , Website May 17, 2018 at 10:11 pm GMT
What "cancellation" of which promise to supply the S-300?? There never was any promise to do so to start with. There were only certain questions asked by the JMSM in certain time before the long-planned visit of Netanyahu on May, 9. The Russian generals had to give some sort of replies. An ambiguous ones. But the JMSM of course made a conclusion that Russia indeed is planning the sale. Fast-forward to 9th of May, Bibi comes/Bibi leaves, and the same JMSM would ask the new questions. To which Moscow obviously had to voice a denial. As a result – Bibi is a hero at home, while Putin was made look weak. http://www.ancreport.com/report/the-phantom-s-300/
Erebus , May 18, 2018 at 2:12 am GMT
@Randal

The photos I've seen indicate that the system (if really the same one) had indeed fired off its missiles and was ready to move as its hydraulic stabilizers had been retracted, and its radar panel folded. If the crew left the system uncamouflaged and were "standing around smoking", that can suggest a number of different possibilities. It may indicate a breakdown in discipline, but they may have been awaiting orders, or even had a mechanical breakdown en route to a new location. Likely a combination. Who knows?

So, maybe not "part of the action" in the sense that it was actively targeting/firing at incoming missiles, but definitely "part of the action" in the sense that it had been obviously doing just that moments before. If its missiles and auto-cannon had seen some successes, it may even be seen to have "won" rather than been part of a "clear defeat".

In any case, it seems that surprisingly little damage was done. The system was hit in the front cab area and looked eminently repairable in the photos.

The SAA has seen some discipline problems in the field, and since a number of the the general staff defected early in the war, a disjointed command & control system. Under Russian tutelage, they're vastly better today than they were 2 years ago, but perhaps not quite there yet. If the reports from late 2015 are to be believed, the Russians were very frustrated with how the SAA operated, and basically had to impose discipline by threatening, and then actually leaving.
My guess is that that's a large part of why the Russians are reluctant to provide potent weapons such as the S300. The political implications of using them can outweigh their military utility, and so must remain under strict control. If somebody starts shooting down US or IL jets at stand-off distances, things can get uncomfortably complex very quickly. The Russians don't need that to worry about along with everything else.

byrresheim , May 18, 2018 at 3:50 am GMT
Russia and Russians will have to come to terms with the fact they are disliked in large parts of Eastern Europe, with the possible exception of Serbia.

There are reasons for this, whether just or unjust.

The reaction to comment #1 which might be seen as sarcastic seems a case in point.

I am certain that unfortunate accidents like the coup in Ukraine might in the future be avoided by a bit more self-awareness and awareness of massive prejudices inherited from an often less than glorious past.

One has to see, however, that in the Ukrainian case, like in the Georgian case before, Russia acted swiftly and decisively to reach a position which might be considered better than the status quo ante before the Free West™ started its sheganigans. So perhaps the awareness exists and the contingency planning is in place?

That is why I still have more than a little hope for Syria and by extension christendom in Syria and Lebanon. All to often it is forgotten that these wars in Arabia are also wars against the christion minorities in Arabia.

Ronald Thomas West , Website May 19, 2018 at 6:42 am GMT
Well, this guy save me the trouble of commenting:

https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/05/the-saker-isnt-just-wrong-hes-irrelevant-putins-an-excellent-warrior/

Miro23 , May 19, 2018 at 7:57 am GMT
@Randal

The Israeli goal remains to destroy the Syrian state, destroy Hezbollah and destroy Iran as a regional rival. Israel does not need to do these things – claims that it is under serious threat are outright propaganda lies. It wants to do them, in order to gain in regional power over its rivals and increase further its impunity to continue and escalate its ongoing settler colonization programs enabled by the US.

In fact it seems to go further. Planned Greater Israel expands territorially to include Jordan, Lebanon, most of Syria, western Iraq (oil producing regions), all the Gulf States, all northern Saudi Arabia (oil producing regions) and the Sinai and other parts of Egypt.

It's the Israeli Imperial dream of becoming a World Power and also controlling the world's oil supply, somewhat analogous to Hitler's dream of a German World Empire based on colonization of the East and a Greater Germany extending to the Urals.

Both are/were racist-Imperialist projects with the difference that the Germans tried to realize the dream using their own military (insufficient) while the Israelis are trying to do it using US forces.

How long the US plays along (or rather is intimidated into playing along) with this one sided project is an open question – and there's clearly the issue of how Israel is going to win these wars without troops on the ground. At least Hitler had most of his army in Russia and detailed plans for post-war ethnic German settlement.

The Americans aren't going to fight more large scale ground wars in the Middle East and Israeli/US proxy forces have failed – so that leaves the destruction of the Middle East from the air – which doesn't really further the Greater Israel project. Political control on the ground stays the same – generating even greater anti-Israeli/anti-American sentiment (if that is possible).

Russia correctly opts to keep clear of this mess, and there is only negative blowback for Israel and the United States – actually serving to isolate internally destabilize these countries.

Erebus , May 20, 2018 at 1:08 am GMT
@Randal

At the moment the Russians look either two-faced or weak (and perhaps they are both) in the face of Israel. That's not a look Russia can afford to have come to be their characterising feature, in the long run.

Yes, from certain perspectives it does indeed look like that, but I doubt many of us here are very aware of the calculi being used at the state level, and especially of Russia's. "Losing face" may be the equivalent of sacrificing a pawn.

There are some complex processes underway, involving a bewildering number of moving parts. "Russiagate" is imploding in the US at an accelerating rate, heading for a constitutional crisis. The 2 Koreas are cooking up a scheme between them (w/ support) to end the US' domination of the W. Pacific. More critical than all, in my view, is Trump's abrogation of the JCPOA. This has put the US on a trajectory at odds with its allies, and played directly into the hands of its adversaries. As evidence of the latter, Merkel and Putin have met 2x in May, and Germany's new foreign minister has also visited with Lavrov. It may well be the geo-political tipping point.

Remembering Obama's & Kerry's words at the the time the JCPOA was agreed
Obama in Aug '15:
"Instead of strengthening our position as some have suggested, Congress's rejection would almost certainly result in multilateral sanctions unraveling We'd have to cut off countries like China from the American financial system trigger(ing) severe disruptions in our own economy and, by the way, rais(ing) questions internationally about the dollar's role as the world's reserve currency. "
John Kerry, a few days later:
"If we turn around and nix the deal and then tell them, 'you're going to have to obey our rules and sanctions anyway,' that is a recipe, very quickly, for the American dollar to cease to be the reserve currency of the world. "

With the EU now agreeing to transact with Iran in EURs, Obama's & Kerry's words look to have been much more than hyperbole, "Losing face", in these circumstances may be nothing more than what you do as you play rope-a-dope while the big guy punches himself out.

We shall see what happens after the World Cup.

I think that's colouring current events more than we give it credit for. It's an opportune time for rogue nations to play games and throw tantrums, but I think a new set of rules will be introduced after the show is over.

Avery , May 20, 2018 at 4:23 am GMT
@Anon

{Maybe it would have been better if the Germans had defeated and occupied Russia and killed all the commies.}

Maybe it would have been much better for Nazis to have occupied whatever putrid swamp you are from and killed off pond scum like you.

Nazis invaded Soviet Union in order to exterminate the Slavic peoples, the supposed Untermenschen , take their fast, fertile lands, and populate them with the alleged "Master Race".

Except they turned out to be somewhat less than "Master", because those Untermenschen chased the pitiful remainders of the Nazi invaders all the way back to Berlin, and those Untermenschen Red Army soldiers pissed on the ashes of the supposed "Master Race" leader.

(Hitler's bloviations about Bolsheviks and all that was just a convenient excuse and to snow his military who might be less than enthusiastic about murdering civilians of SU.)

btw: it is not too late for youse and your buddies to put on your uniforms, polish up your jack-boots, grab your weapons .and invade Russia. Who know maybe youse will get lucky and will get a gift wrapped Sarmat express -delivered right to your address.

[May 20, 2018] Is Wikipedia An Establishment Psyop Zero Hedge

May 20, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Until recently I haven't been closely following the controversy between Wikipedia and popular anti-imperialist activists like John Pilger, George Galloway, Craig Murray, Neil Clark, Media Lens, Tim Hayward and Piers Robinson. Wikipedia has always been biased in favor of mainstream CNN/CIA narratives, but until recently I hadn't seen much evidence that this was due to anything other than the fact that Wikipedia is a crowdsourced project and most people believe establishment-friendly narratives. That all changed when I read this article by Craig Murra y, which is primarily what I'm interested in directing people's attention to here.

The article, and this one which prompted it by Five Filters , are definitely worth reading in their entirety, because their contents are jaw-dropping. In short there is an account which has been making edits to Wikipedia entries for many nears called Philip Cross. In the last five years this account's operator has not taken a single day off–no weekends, holidays, nothing–and according to their time log they work extremely long hours adhering to a very strict, clockwork schedule of edits throughout the day as an ostensibly unpaid volunteer.

This is bizarre enough, but the fact that this account is undeniably focusing with malicious intent on anti-imperialist activists who question establishment narratives and the fact that its behavior is being aggressively defended by Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales means that there's some serious fuckery afoot.

"Philip Cross", whoever or whatever that is, is absolutely head-over-heels for depraved Blairite war whore Oliver Kamm, whom Cross mentioned as a voice of authority no fewer than twelve times in an entry about the media analysis duo known collectively as Media Lens. Cross harbors a special hatred for British politician and broadcaster George Galloway, who opposed the Iraq invasion as aggressively as Oliver Kamm cheered for it, and on whose Wikipedia entry Cross has made an astonishing 1,800 edits.

me title=

Despite the overwhelming evidence of constant malicious editing, as well as outright admissions of bias by the Twitter account linked to Philip Cross, Jimmy Wales has been extremely and conspicuously defensive of the account's legitimacy while ignoring evidence provided to him.

"Or, just maybe, you're wrong," Wales said to a Twitter user inquiring about the controversy the other day. "Show me the diffs or any evidence of any kind. The whole claim appears so far to be completely ludicrous."

"Riiiiight," said the totally not-triggered Wales in another response. "You are really very very far from the facts of reality here. You might start with even one tiny shred of some kind of evidence, rather than just making up allegations out of thin air. But you won't because trolling."

"You clearly have very very little idea how it works," Wales tweeted in another response. "If your worldview is shaped by idiotic conspiracy sites, you will have a hard time grasping reality."

As outlined in the articles by Murray and Five Filters , the evidence is there in abundance. Five Filters lays out "diffs" (editing changes) in black and white showing clear bias by the Philip Cross account, a very slanted perspective is clearly and undeniably documented, and yet Wales denies and aggressively ridicules any suggestion that something shady could be afoot. This likely means that Wales is in on whatever game the Philip Cross account is playing. Which means the entire site is likely involved in some sort of psyop by a party which stands to benefit from keeping the dominant narrative slanted in a pro-establishment direction.

A 2016 Pew Research Center report found that Wikipedia was getting some 18 billion page views per month . Billion with a 'b'. Youtube recently announced that it's going to be showing text from Wikipedia articles on videos about conspiracy theories to help "curb fake news". Plainly the site is extremely important in the battle for control of the narrative about what's going on in the world. Plainly its leadership fights on one side of that battle, which happens to be the side that favors western oligarchs and intelligence agencies.

How many other "Philip Cross"-like accounts are there on Wikipedia? Has the site always functioned an establishment psyop designed to manipulate public perception of existing power structures, or did that start later? I don't know. Right now all I know is that an agenda very beneficial to the intelligence agencies, war profiteers and plutocrats of the western empire is clearly and undeniably being advanced on the site, and its founder is telling us it's nothing. He is lying. Watch him closely.

* * *

Internet censorship is getting pretty bad, so best way to keep seeing my daily articles is to get on the mailing list for my website , so you'll get an email notification for everything I publish. My articles and podcasts are entirely reader and listener-funded, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , checking out my podcast , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , or buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers . Vote up! 13 Vote down! 0


Cardinal Fang Sun, 05/20/2018 - 21:47 Permalink

Of course it's a psyop

No1uNo -> Cardinal Fang Sun, 05/20/2018 - 21:51 Permalink

reading the "talk" tab page background on ANY wiki page is ALWAYS recommended - it shows the content war by different editors. - Anything on Israel / Palestine for example.

Bitchface-KILLAH -> No1uNo Sun, 05/20/2018 - 21:53 Permalink

Yes.

Post or edit anything on that shit site that goes against the ziomaster's narrative and you will be blocked. Wikipedia just rehashes all the bullshit from the corporate media on Television.

Metabunk and Rationalwiki are the exact same thing too.

cheka -> Bitchface-KILLAH Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:05 Permalink

(((yes)))

look up the wiki definition of hate group

hint - white, conservative.... nothing else even gets a passing mention

Leakanthrophy -> cheka Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:15 Permalink

Does the pope shit in the woods after playing with little boys?

95% of things placed in top 3 of Google search are PSYOP. The remaining 5% are those pesky old school blackhat SEO guys that know how to game the search engine.

Wikipedia is as fake as WWE is. But at least WWE has some juicy stuff:

WWE Diva Zelina Vega Nude Photos Leaked

https://celebrity-leaks.net/wwe-diva-zelina-vega-nude-photos-leaked/

Cognitive Dissonance -> Leakanthrophy Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:23 Permalink

The method is as old as the hills.

To maintain Empire, truth must be co-opt, controlled or crushed.

ClickNLook -> Cognitive Dissonance Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:31 Permalink

Was it really smart to put history on internet and make it editable?

robertsgt40 -> ClickNLook Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:35 Permalink

Is that a trick question? I'll check with Snopes.

DownWithYogaPants -> robertsgt40 Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:39 Permalink

The Zionist side is ALWAYS the side that is presented.

Eustace Mullins was a truly kind individual. His only crime was to not swallow the hogwash Koolaid of the ZioNAZI. For that he was followed by the FBI for 30 years.

But of course all the standard tropes are trotted out on Wikipedia. I suspect that Wiki / Wales gets a lot of funding from YOU KNOW WHO. Same people who has the Germans put people in jail for thought crimes.

You are only safe when you are looking at a page regarding theoretical mathematics. But not mathematics about global warming.

Automatic Choke -> DownWithYogaPants Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:43 Permalink

among scientists, wiki is well known for utility and accuracy of boring stuff like the thermal conductivity of copper. any controversy involved, and it is worthless.

The First Rule -> Leakanthrophy Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:34 Permalink

Wikipedia is completely unreliable. Especially when it comes to politics.

You can find LIES GALORE. You can edit the Lies out, document them and backup with sourced justification; but within an hour they will have reset the Lie.

They simply don't care about the Truth.

VWAndy Sun, 05/20/2018 - 21:51 Permalink

Full spectrum dominance folks. Its not like they are short on cash.

911bodysnatchers322 Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:03 Permalink

People are finally catching up

Aaaand finally: James Corbett of Corbettreport.com, a prolific documentary filmmaker--whose docs are always top rated on topdocumentaryfilms.com, doesn't have a wikipedia page, despite MANY people trying to create one for him. Why is that, you ask? Because they are extremely subversive to the CIA and the established globalist order, and therefore that fact of suppression of Corbett suggests coordination between Wikipedia and the globalist thalassocracy of the empire of the city

Urban Roman Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:09 Permalink

More to the point:

How close is ZH to being a limited hangout?

How much 'filtering' is being done, and through what channels do filtering requests arrive? (if any)

Lots of news outlets have changed over the last few years. Formerly respected papers have been reduced to tabloids. The Washington Post is now the Bezos Blog, for example. Twitter is popping up 'warnings' about 'fake news'. All the radio and TV channels run identical bullshit war stories within minutes of each other. And Wikipedia has been going downhill for years.

So, is ZH immune to the effluvia from the ministry of truth?

David Rockefeller Sun, 05/20/2018 - 22:24 Permalink

Nice article, but there is a much better way of proving that Wikipedia=CIA. It's true, everybody can edit Wikipedia, but not everyone gets to keep their edits. Here is an experiment that everyone can carry out :

If you edit well or create a new informative page on something of no interest to the FBI or CIA, say astronomy or physics, no problem, your contribution stays. But try to provide evidence--and there is plenty--that the government was involved in the assassinations of MLK, JFK, RFK or the demolitions of 9/11, and you'll be "reverted" (their term) within FIVE minutes. Try to quote Russia's version of the Crimeans' overwhelming vote to join Russia, and you'll be "reverted" lickety split. Provide evidence that Winston Churchill--lionized by our rulers--was an imperialist, a racist, a champion of inequality, and the contribution will disappear while you pause your honest labors for a cup of tea! Our rulers are masters of propaganda, and Wikipedia is just one of their brilliantly vicious outlets--created, controlled, and edited to brainwash us!

[May 20, 2018] Real political power in this world is the ability to control the dominant narrative about what's going on

May 20, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

The reason we are not given a straight answer as to why we're meant to want our institutions fighting an information war on our behalf (instead of allowing us to sort out fact from fiction on our own like adults) is because the answer is ugly.

As we discussed last time , the only real power in this world is the ability to control the dominant narrative about what's going on. The only reason government works the way it works, money operates the way it operates, and authority rests where it rests is because everyone has agreed to pretend that that's how things are. In actuality, government, money and authority are all man-made conceptual constructs and the collective can choose to change them whenever it wants. The only reason this hasn't happened in our deeply dysfunctional society yet is because the plutocrats who rule us have been successful in controlling the narrative.

Whoever controls the narrative controls the world. This has always been the case. In many societies throughout history a guy who made alliances with the biggest, baddest group of armed thugs could take control of the narrative by killing people until the dominant narrative was switched to "That guy is our leader now; whatever he says goes." In modern western society, the real leaders are less obvious, and the narrative is controlled by propaganda.

Propaganda is what keeps Americans accepting things like the fake two-party system, growing wealth inequality, medicine money being spent on bombs to be dropped on strangers in stupid immoral wars, and a government which simultaneously creates steadily increasing secrecy privileges for itself and steadily decreasing privacy rights for its citizenry. It's also what keeps people accepting that a dollar is worth what it's worth, that personal property works the way it works, that the people on Capitol Hill write the rules, and that you need to behave a certain way around a police officer or he can legally kill you.

And therein lies the answer to the question. You are not being protected from "disinformation" by a compassionate government who is deeply troubled to see you believing erroneous beliefs, you are being herded back toward the official narrative by a power establishment which understands that losing control of the narrative means losing power. It has nothing to do with Russia, and it has nothing to do with truth. It's about power, and the unexpected trouble that existing power structures are having dealing with the public's newfound ability to network and share information about what is going on in the world.

[May 16, 2018] Rex Tillerson Takes Shots at Donald Trump During Virginia Military Institute Commencement Speech

That's strange to here this from form State Department head who wobble the truth on daily basis ;-) But the quotes are really good, while the man definitly is not...
He put extremely high standard for a human life: "Absent a life of integrity, no human being can live a life that is complete and whole," he said. "Living a life of integrity, perhaps we have a chance."
Compare with cynical Oscar Wilde quote "
As for truth, when neocons get to power, filth starts to flower downhill. The lies became "business as usual" and starts to overpower truth. Much like in the USSR. So, in a way, the truth is the first victim of the neoliberalism. The neoliberal ruling class succumbs to and supports all perversions. These kind of dirt-bags democracy have no aversion
Notable quotes:
"... If our leaders seek to conceal the truth, or we as people become accepting of alternative realities that are no longer grounded in facts, then we as American citizens are on a pathway to relinquishing our freedom. ..."
"... "A responsibility of every American citizen to each other is to preserve and protect our freedom by recognizing what truth is and is not, what a fact is and is not and begin by holding ourselves accountable to truthfulness and demand our pursuit of America's future be fact-based -- not based on wishful thinking, not hoped-for outcomes made in shallow promises, but with a clear-eyed view of the facts as they are, and guided by the truth that will set us free to seek solutions to our most daunting challenges." ..."
May 16, 2018 | www.theroot.com

Tillerson was the country's top diplomat until March, when he was fired by Donald Trump and replaced by CIA Director Mike Pompeo. NBC News reports that Tillerson called on the graduates to maintain a "fierce defense of the truth."

"As I reflect upon the state of our American democracy, I observe a growing crisis in ethics and integrity," Tillerson said in his speech. " If our leaders seek to conceal the truth, or we as people become accepting of alternative realities that are no longer grounded in facts, then we as American citizens are on a pathway to relinquishing our freedom. "

He added, "When we as people, a free people, go wobbly on the truth, even on what may seem the most trivial of matters, we go wobbly on America."

"A responsibility of every American citizen to each other is to preserve and protect our freedom by recognizing what truth is and is not, what a fact is and is not and begin by holding ourselves accountable to truthfulness and demand our pursuit of America's future be fact-based -- not based on wishful thinking, not hoped-for outcomes made in shallow promises, but with a clear-eyed view of the facts as they are, and guided by the truth that will set us free to seek solutions to our most daunting challenges."

[May 15, 2018] Why isn't putin helping syria defend herself from israeli attacks some answers from the commentariat at MoA by wendy davis

caucus99percent.com

This diary may be on the absurd side, but I know that this issue's bothered any number of us (including many tankies on Twitter), but this comment thread posits some opinions and offers many links to buttress arguments. Of course there were disagreements I haven't included, but not wanting to risk a wider war with Israel at this point, with so many dangers on Russia's borders makes sense to me. Can't say I've checked out more than a couple links

It really was disgusting it was to see Bibi with Putin at the V-day celebration in Moscow while the IDF was striking 'Iranian' (not so much) installations in Syria. Some say having Bibi there was by way of an object lesson: 'See what we've got?' I'm agnostic on that point, but I've grabbed these comments for your consideration and have just pasted them in raw with no quotations marks. Happy digging; dunno what a comment might on this PSA might include, but let's just see how it goes. They're out of time order, as I'd forgotten to Save the ones I'd grabbed early on, and have had to go back to copy more.

From Moon of Alabama's ' open thread' (2 pages of comments) on May 11:

..

Also not a good sign that President Putin re-nominated Medvedev (not the URL) as Prime Minister. The Saker lays out the rationale for this view.

Posted by: Trisha Driscoll | May 11, 2018

With regard to Medvedev. Let's just end this now.

Vesti news has a 10-minute clip showing the Duma in session to approve or disapprove Medvedev as Prime Minister. It's a great glimpse into the parliamentary side of things that we rarely see. Putin states that the social reforms he has called for and intends to carry out have been planned and examined with a fine tooth comb for a year and a half – by a team led by Medvedev. It makes sense to him, he says, that this same team would now carry these plans forward.

Can we not get beyond our own particular preferences of policy flavor and understand that Medvedev long ago ago gave up the Atlanticist affiliation – when, indeed, that option politically receded from his country's shores – and is simply a team player now, subservient to Russia and to Putin? And what he thinks in his own mind is nobody's business but his? He has no power outside of being a Prime Minister who effectuates Putin's vision.

And personally, I suspect he takes some satisfaction from doing this well. I don't care what transforms or redeems a man. I just care what fits the need of the moment. The hour produces the man, be he ever so tainted from former allegiances.

Medvedev's Tumultuous Confirmation Hearings (and of course, Zhirinovsky Calls for Reinstatement of Russian Monarchy)

pa..Vesti is cranking out so much Russian news and news shows now, in short clips with English subtitles – often half a dozen per day – that I've added it to my daily news scan. I reccomend the YouTube channel: Vesti News

Posted by: Grieved | May 11, 2018 8:50:47 PM | 71

Putin has done more to stop, blunt or block US military aggression than any other country.

He picked Syria to put Russian military up against US military. If he had not not done so, the Syrians that are still dying due to the terrorists and their sponsors would, along with hundreds of thousands of others have been dead in the jihadist takeover in 2015.

the Palestinians? What is the rest of the world doing about this? How many other countries deal with Israel. What is you country doing for the Palestinians.

There have been many proposed resolutions against Syria in the UN but US has vetoed them all. Israel can be brought into line only when US power is destroyed.

Many of the worlds conflicts that exist today can never be resolved until US power is destroyed as it is the US that keeps those conflicts as open wounds.

For Russia putting all their efforts into say Palestine or Yemen and the many other conflicts is like running around putting out spot fires rather than catching the arsonist.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | May 11, 2018 9:02:14 PM |

..

Korybko interprets Russian signals as message to Assad to "compromise," which I don't agree with at all as such a "demand" backwalks numerous previous statements about Syria by Russia, which isn't normal Kremlin behavior. In essence, Korybko's arguing that the relationship between Zionists and Russia is more important than Russia's relations with Syria, Iraq, and Iran–a huge misread on his part, IMO.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 11, 2018

.

Strategic Culture's published a very powerful editorial. Teaser:

"The reckless, reprehensible behavior of the US towards international law, multilateralism and diplomacy – all of which it falsely projects onto Russia, China and others – is, or should be, a watershed moment for all of the world to recognize that such rogue conduct is intolerable and unacceptable.

"Either there is multilateral accord or there is not. Either there is a multipolar world as envisaged by a democracy of nations, or there is brutish hegemony of unipolar ambitions. The latter is not law-abiding. It is predicated on the brutish principle of "might is right". The world cannot afford such a hegemon for the sake of peace and survival."

It certainly echoes much of what's written by b and us Barflies.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 11, 2018

Russia's catching a lot of blogger-flak regarding its failure to go to war with Israel. That's not smart.

Here's the probable scenario as I see it, keeping in mind that the #1 priority for Russia is its own political interests and its own security, which is true of every country.

There are three allies concerned with Syria led by Russia, and including Turkey and Iran. Three unlkely allies, actually. But they are trying to get along, with Russia's objective a return of Syria to full sovereignty of all its territory, and a cessation of hostilities, with a Russian military presence. It's not been easy but there has been progress and it looks like Russia and its allies will be successful.

Iran has that objective too, but also has a strong interest in aiding Hezbollah as a powerful anti-Israel force. That includes provisioning Hezbollah in Syria with ballistic missiles.

Russia (in my probable scenario) said to Iran don't do that. It endangers our chief interest in Syria which is to win the war against US/Israel and end the warfare. Don't do anything that endangers that. But Iran did it anyhow, and has paid a price which Syria shares. And as a part of that, Russia has taken no action against Israel because it expected this might happen, that's why Iran was cautioned. Iran thought it could do whatever it wanted in Syria and it got burned.

So I say to anti-Russia bloggers, wake up and smell the coffee.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 11, 2018

..

Here's what Putin said to Nuttyahoo according to Kremlin :

"Naturally, we will use your visit today to discuss bilateral relations and problems in the region. Unfortunately, the situation is very acute. I would like to express hope that you and I will not only manage to discuss, but also find solutions which will lead to a shift in the situation, and which will also allow us to find ways to resolve heated conflicts."

Putin's clearly aiming at de-escalation, while Nutty's all about escalating.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 11, 2018

I used to admire Korybko enormously, and I thought him a brilliant talent. I don't know what's happened in the last few months. Every one of his articles seems to be a mis-read. He's chosen a view of reality that I think is wrong, and everything he extrapolates from that is off-kilter.

We all choose at what level down the rabbit hole we want to go, but whatever it is, our predictions should accord with subsequent events, or we can know it's an inaccurate ledge to perch on. Korybko keeps saying there's a hidden agenda and a secret union between Israel and Russia that makes all the rest of the Syria campaign a sham. He's become as unreliable as Paul Craig Roberts at reading the true balances, and as unreliable, it pains me to say, as the Saker appears at times lately. They all call for the sky to fall tomorrow, or else say that it already has and the fix is in, and resistance is futile.

Miracles abound. But everyone is so damn gloomy. Is it a new CIA manic-depression drug? Radio waves? Crazy.

Posted by: Grieved | May 11, 2018

.

Too many cast Putin as Tsar; he is not. National security issues are discussed and solved by a council of same name through consensus. Same with Foreign Relations. One aspect of Russia that differs greatly from almost every Western nation is the Russian government acts in the best interest of all Russians , not just a select nomenclatura as in Outlaw US Empire and UK.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 11, 2018

During the course of the Ukraine war I, and I imagine many others, went through some of the feelings about Vladimir Putin that many people are expressing now. We grew impatient. We wanted Russia to go in and kick Porky's ass into the high heavens. We wanted the Chocolate King toasted. But Putin carried on with his minimalist strategy, his control over emotion and ego, his resource stinginess, providing just enough to the Donbas warriors, just enough. It was nail-biting and frustrating at times, but If Russia had gone into Ukraine, guns blazing (as Russia's enemies wanted) it would probably be bankrupt by now.

Scene change to Syria and we have the same minimum aircraft, troops, special forces Minimum but enough. Israel feels very strongly about the S-300. Putin and his generals have probably verified for themselves what they long suspected – that many products built by the US military industrials since the 1990s are pretty crap. Just look at the F-35 and the Boeing 787 "Dreamliner", which pilots and cabin crew refer to as the "binliner" due to its continuous faults. After a PHD on more-or-less this subject my humble self came to the same conclusion.

So do the Syrians really need the S-300 when they seem to be doing fine with what they have got? They could be beefed up with some Pantsirs and Buks. Why antagonize Israel needlessly? Why risk WWIII? Why risk Russia's World Cup – when sabotage and stealth are what the Israelis are best at? Why not just keep slipping Assad stuff that will keep the Israeli's guessing?

Posted by: Lochearn | May 11, 2018

.

@ Grieved who wrote: "Miracles abound. But everyone is so damn gloomy. Is it a new CIA manic-depression drug? Radio waves? Crazy."

The more the elite can rile the public with fear and anger against others the better their chances of manipulating events to their ends at least that is their plan and I am not seeing white flags yet.

Yes, we are in the middle of a watershed event for humanity where the real issue of whether a small elite continue to control the tools of finance is being fought as a battle between Israel et al and the rest of the world through Syria/Iran/??? That the issues are so intertwined and so misunderstood by the public is a human travesty that I attribute to brainwashing by the Western media.

The good thing about this situation is that we are in it because the old way is breaking down all around us and energy abounds for supporting structural change. For someone who has been watching and waiting for 40+ years, I am DAMN happy to see such an opportunity for human growth present itself in my lifetime.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 11, 2018

@ 27

Peskov corrects :

May 11. /TASS/. The refusal to supply the S-300 air defense missile systems to Syria is not linked in any way with the recent visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Moscow, acting Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday.

Peskov commented on a statement, which acting Russian Presidential Aide for Military and Technical Cooperation Vladimir Kozhin gave in an interview with the newspaper Izvestia.

"Technologically, it is absolutely incorrect to link this [Kozhin's words] with Netanyahu's visit because the interview was given before Netanyahu's visit," the acting Kremlin spokesman pointed out.

Russia has never announced such deliveries and only specified that it reserves the right in the wake of US-led airstrikes against Syria to do everything possible in this situation.

In an interview published on Friday, Kozhin said that Russia was not delivering the S-300 air defense missile systems to Syria and no talks had been underway on their delivery thus far.

As the acting Kremlin spokesman added, the Syrian army "has everything it needs."

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated on April 16 that Russia was ready to consider all necessary steps to reinforce Syria's defense capabilities, including the delivery of the S-300 systems.

Unlike the West, RF does not pre-announce. Just do it!

Do you think Putin is pleased about this?

Israeli Weapons Among Arms Handed Over to Syrian Army By Terrorists in Damascus

Oh, not just medical aid!

Posted by: Likklemore | May 11, 2018

..

Explanation of Russia's approach by Andrei Korybko. Russia is taking a balance-of-power approach, not a bloc approach, to Syria. Hence its ambiguous stances towards Turkey, Iran, and Israel. Beyond what is required to defeat the Takfiris and assure the stability of the Syrian government, the rest is negotiable. Putin does not want the situation between Iran and Israel to escalate, and to that end is seeking greater influence in Syria vis-a-vis Iran.

http://www.eurasiafuture.com/2018/05/09/why-cry-its-great-news-that-trump-pulled-out-of-the-iran-deal/

..

Such a massive organized aggression has been inflicted on Syria, so much effort has been put into sujugating and destroying Syria, the Syrians have suffered so horribly. Years of economic warfare – sanctions, tens of thousands of mercenary madmen from dozens of countries deployed against Syria, entire cities destroyed, massive amounts of arms and financing provided to the madmen, global mass media disinformation deployed, oil stolen, thousands of US bombs dropped, continual Israeli attacks and subterfuge, NATO special forces deployed, massive mercenary underground construction project at Douma, false flags, Turkish aggression, Saudi complicity, and more.

And how do things stand, after seven years of this? Syrians are inspirational for their resistance, Syria is battered but winning, Russia's standing has risen as she has saved Syria, the mercenaries are largely eliminated or herded into specific areas; Israelis and Americans have lost yet more international standing, are more obviously outlaw regimes, and have lost self confidence; their military intimidation is more and more lacking in real authority. NATO is licking its wounds and is less cohesive, occupied Germany is showing signs of awakening, Turkey and the US are at odds, the British are a malicious joke, the Saudis are weaker, Iran and Lebanon are stronger, Iraqis despise the Americans, China is stronger.

Meanwhile, Russia too has been under US led economic warfare attack, and near global disinformation attack, and demonization. And yet she too is stronger in many ways than she was just a few years ago.

Posted by: Robert Snefjella | May 11, 2018

..

karlof1 @20

There's nothing in that statement that approves of Israel's attack. And informing Putin of a changed stance due to a perception that 'red lines' were crossed (red lines that would've been discussed weeks or months prior) would be positioned by Netanyahu as a courtesy ( when it is really just a sneaky attempt at battlefield advantage).

Here's a thought (not fully baked):the Russians have their eye on the ball. Those who are focused on Zionists as a problem for a West easily miss the fact that USA is a bigger problem for Russia than Israel. USA is the "power behind the throne". Zionists and neocons may manipulate that power but it is better for Russia to make an effort to separate Israel from the West. You catch more flies with honey.

If SCO becomes strong enough to offer meaningful security guarantees and Israel also has an opportunity to participate in lucrative economic opportunities in Eurasia then Israel might be enticed to end it's belligerent manipulation of US. It may require a new generation of leadership in Israel before that happens. Russia-China are playing long games.

Posted by: Jackrabbit

.

OJS:

So you run around spouting your hatred for Putin because he does not proclaim himself world policeman and and does not crap on about R2P. As he has said, he is not anybodies friend. He is the president of the Russian federation.

In this video I linked earlier, he plainly states his position on Israel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJnIsbo5uMs

Like it or not Putin recognizes and operates within International law and Russian law, and respects UN recognized borders. Putin, all the time he has been President has operated on the principle of evolution not revolution. He is not about to change now.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | May 11, 2018

The more the elite can rile the public with fear and anger against others the better their chances of manipulating events to their ends at least that is their plan and I am not seeing white flags yet.

Yes, we are in the middle of a watershed event for humanity where the real issue of whether a small elite continue to control the tools of finance is being fought as a battle between Israel et al and the rest of the world through Syria/Iran/??? That the issues are so intertwined and so misunderstood by the public is a human travesty that I attribute to brainwashing by the Western media.

The good thing about this situation is that we are in it because the old way is breaking down all around us and energy abounds for supporting structural change. For someone who has been watching and waiting for 40+ years, I am DAMN happy to see such an opportunity for human growth present itself in my lifetime.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 11, 2018

*****************************************************

I'll add a few other things that may or may not be of interest:

'Who we are, why we're digging: Team probing Syrian war & Skripal poisoning case reveal all', the UK working group on Syria, propaganda, and media, via RT (with this video, 9:26)

[May 13, 2018] Confusion over Netanyahu visit to Moscow and Putin passivity over recurrent Israeli strikes of Syria territory

Notable quotes:
"... Suppose there were no Russia in Syria, what would have happened? Libya would have been the fate. Most likely US would have recognized Golan Ht as Israel's. Oil harvesting companies would become more visible. Lebanon would have been in flames. Nothing else in ME. Some more terror attacks in EU may be. ..."
"... The real purpose of the Donald's missile-rattling is nothing more than helping Bibi Netanyahu keep his coalition of right wing religious and settler parties (Likud, United Torah Judaism, Shas, Kulanu and the Jewish Home) together, thereby maintaining his slim 61-vote majority in the 120-seat Knesset. ..."
"... Netanyahu's malefic political glue is the utterly false claim that Iran is an "existential threat" to Israel because it is hell-bent on getting the bomb. ..."
"... As a matter of record, of course, Netanyahu has been saying this since the early 1990s and he has always been wrong because there were never any facts or logic to support his blatant fear-mongering. ..."
May 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

Originally from: The Skripals will most likely never be allowed to talk, by The Saker - The Unz Review

There have been major developments this week, all of them bad, including Putin re-nominating Medvedev as his Prime Minister, and Bibi Netanyahu invited to Moscow to the Victory Day Parade in spite of him bombing Syria, a Russian ally, just on the eve of his visit. Once in Moscow, Netanyahu compared Iran to, what else, Nazi Germany . How original and profound indeed! Then he proceeded to order the bombing of Syria for a second time , while still in Moscow. But then, what can we expect from a self-worshiping narcissist who finds it appropriate to serve food to the Japanese Prime Minister in a specially made shoe ? The man is clearly batshit crazy (which in no way makes him less evil or dangerous). But it is the Russian reaction which is so totally disgusting: nothing, absolutely nothing. Unlike others, I have clearly said that it is not the Russian responsibility to "protect" Syria (or Iran) from the Israelis. But there is no doubt in my mind that Netanyahu has just publicly thumbed his nose at Putin and that Putin took it. For all my respect for Putin, this time he allowed Netanyahu to treat him just like Trump treated Macron. Except that in the case of Putin, he was so treated in his own capital. That makes it even worse.

[Interestingly, while whining about "Nazi Iran" Netanyahu did say something truly profound and true. He said " an important history lesson: when a murderous ideology emerges, one has to push back against it before it is too late". That is indeed exactly what most people across the world feel about Israel and its Zionist ideology but, alas, their voice is completely ignored by those who rule over them. So yes, it sure looks to me like it is becoming "too late" and that the consequences for our collective cowardice -- most of us are absolutely terrified from speaking the plain truth about our Zionist overlords - will cost us all a terrible price.]

Then, of course, there is Donald Trump pulling out of the so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in spite of Iran's full compliance and in spite of the fact that the US does not have the authority to unilaterally withdraw from this multilateral agreement. But being the megalomaniac that he is, and not to mention the spineless lackey of the Israel Lobby, Trump ignored all that and thereby created further tensions between the US and the rest of the world whom the US will now blackmail and bully to try to force it to support the US in its rabid subservience to Israel. As for the Israelis, their "sophisticated" "strategy" is primitive to the extreme: first get Trump to create maximal tensions with Iran, then attack the Iranians in Syria as visibly and arrogantly as possible, bait the Iranians into a retaliation, then bellow "OI VEY!!!" with your loudest voice, mention the Holocaust once or twice, toss in a "6 million people" figure, and get the US to attack Syria.

How anybody can respect, nevermind admire, the Israelis is simply beyond comprehension. I sure can't think of a more contemptible, nasty, psychopathic gang of megalomanical thugs (and cowards) than the Israelis. Can you?

Nonetheless, it appears undeniable that the Zionists have enough power to simultaneously force not one, but two (supposed) superpowers to cave into their demands. Not only that, they have the power to do that while also putting these two superpowers on a collision course against each other. At the very least, this shows two things: the United States has completely lost its sovereignty and is now an Israeli protectorate. As for Russia, well, she is doing comparatively better, but the full re-sovereignization the Russian people have voted for when they gave their overwhelming support to Putin will not happen. A comment I read on a Russian chat put it: "Путин кинул народ -- мы не за Медведева голосовали" or " Putin betrayed the people -- we did not vote for Medvedev ". I am not sure that "betrayed the people" is fair, but the fact that he has disappointed a lot of people is, I think, simply undeniable.

It is still way too early to reach any conclusions at this point, and there are still way too many unknown variables, but I will admit that I am very worried and that for the first time in 4 years I am having major doubts about a fundamental policy decision by Putin. I sure hope that I am wrong. We will find out relatively soon. I just hope that this will not be in the form of a major war.

animalogic , May 11, 2018 at 8:14 am GMT

Paul Craig Roberts has repeatedly, for some years now, questioned Putin's apparent willingness to bend over backwards to placate his "partners" in the West.

PCR has maintained consistently that the West can not be trusted, that Russia's attempts at accommodation are taken as signs of weakness, acting only to embolden the West in its continuing vicious assaults.

Of course, Russia is playing for time: hoping that over time the strategic tables will increasing tip in its own & China's etc favour.
However, I suspect Saker & PCR are right: further submission will only lead to ever more vicious attacks. This is made all the worse by China's unwillingness to assert itself internationally as the 2nd largest economic power. (As if it can't see the US strategy, via tariffs etc to retard, if not destroy its future economic development)

One might have a tiny mite of hope that the West might ultimately act sanely. However, with the Zionists now pulling all the strings sanity is over & out.

Momus , May 11, 2018 at 8:20 am GMT
Netanyahu is regarded in Washington, and perhaps also Moscow, as almost Churchillian for his efforts to protect Israel and by extension the region and the US.

Who among us wants horizontal nuclear proliferation and a nuked up Iran armed with ICBM's?

Intelligent Dasein , Website May 11, 2018 at 9:45 am GMT
I've been
Intelligent Dasein , Website May 11, 2018 at 9:45 am GMT
I've been waiting to hear your take, Saker, since things are very bad indeed. I did not like what I saw happen on May 9th. Here is my very abbreviated take on it.

Bibi knows that he's pulled Trump fully into the Israeli orbit. He as much as told Putin he would attack Syria and dared him to do anything about it. If Putin responded with force, that would provide Israel and America with all the provocation they need to go all-in against Syria, Iran, and Russia, which is what the Ziocons were hoping to accomplish anyway. Putin, seeing all this and being the better man, can only sit back and take it. For now.

Bibi pissed in Putin's face and nobody could do a thing about it. But the whole world saw what happened and nobody with half a brain is on the side of the Israelis. I'm no longer upset that Putin didn't respond. He has admirable restraint and patience. The very hand of God Himself will move against the Israelis for all their crimes and treachery, and Putin will still be one of His chief instruments.

Robert Magill , May 11, 2018 at 10:01 am GMT

How anybody can respect, nevermind admire, the Israelis is simply beyond comprehension. I sure can't think of a more contemptible, nasty, psychopathic gang of megalomanical thugs (and cowards) than the Israelis. Can you?

Yes I can, Saker, you live among them.

Then, of course, there is Donald Trump pulling out of the so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in spite of Iran's full compliance and in spite of the fact that the US does not have the authority to unilaterally withdraw from this multilateral agreement

.

See Club Orlov http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/ 5/10 regarding the 120+ billion of Iranian money we hold in dollars the dead broke US gets to keep by pulling out of the deal.

https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2018/04/30/and-then-we-were-capitalists-or/

Rafael Martorell , May 11, 2018 at 10:23 am GMT
Good call. That is why we follow you Saker. It is the responsability of the american men to rebel and fix this goverment.

Im from cuba and the worst part here is that we have been delivered to be control and saked by people that we took the lunch from them when we where kids,in the school yard.

The Scalpel , Website May 11, 2018 at 11:32 am GMT
@utu

Agree. Putin seems to have rolled over and is crying uncle. Sad. Perhaps he is waiting until his new weapons are fully stockpiled before he makes any serious attempts to defend -- ultimately -- himself and his nation.

Without Russia putting some brakes on the Empire's unopposed oppressions, there is little hope for truth, justice, etc. in the world. There is no attempt to print the truth in national publications (that has been going on for a long time), and increasingly, little attempt to hide the fact that they are not printing the truth. The masses, instead of rebelling against obvious lies, seem to have internalized doublethink and do not have any significant impulse to rise up and defend their own interests. The propaganda is too thick, too strong, and too unopposed. Things look grim.

utu , May 11, 2018 at 11:45 am GMT
@Momus

Who among us wants horizontal nuclear proliferation and a nuked up Iran armed with ICBM's?

I think that would be a good check of Israel's power that could stabilize the ME and return to the path of development that existed there still till early 1980s when the process of destabilization began which was a part of the Yinon plan. If Israel remains the absolutely dominant power people in ME countries will be allowed to live in Hobbesian chaotic world only where they will be encouraged to engage in ethnic and sectarian fighting forever.

Anatoly Karlin , Website May 11, 2018 at 11:54 am GMT

How anybody can respect, nevermind admire, the Israelis is simply beyond comprehension.

Why not? Israel has been successfully expanding its territory, and getting two superpowers to cave into its demands (Saker's own words). That is pretty admirable in my book. This is certainly worth of both respect and admiration, even if one otherwise wishes to see Israel burn in a sea of atomic fire.

Anyhow, there's no reason for Russia to care. Increased American tensions with Iran will raise the price of oil. Also a reminder that the Kremlin couldn't care less about American murders of Russian mercenaries. So in what world will they concern themselves with Iranian ones.

A comment I read on a Russian chat put it: "Путин кинул народ -- мы не за Медведева голосовали" or "Putin betrayed the people -- we did not vote for Medvedev".

Ah yes, the сирийские братушки ("Syrian brothers"). Perhaps Western Russophiles consider them such, but few Russians do.

So The Saker is correct, Putin did not betray "his" people. (Well, he did, but that happened in 2014, not now).

utu , May 11, 2018 at 11:59 am GMT
@Intelligent Dasein

I'm no longer upset that Putin didn't respond. He has admirable restraint and patience. The very hand of God Himself will move against the Israelis for all their crimes and treachery, and Putin will still be one of His chief instruments.

This is your wishful thinking talking. You are still upset with Putin and you should be. May 9 parade with Netanyahu and bombing in Syria really looked very bad. To me it signified Putin's capitulation. At least it is the end game and Russia realized she was outplayed as she is apparently not ready to go all the way with the nuclear blackmail. Putin will stay put waiting for the stupid World Cup while Netanyahu will be escalating or some face saving measure will be found for Russia to withdraw from Syria or Russia will be invited to be a part of occupational government there.

Chinese looking from afar probably are disappointed but they never trusted Russian corrupt elite staying the course.

Passer by , May 11, 2018 at 6:20 pm GMT
Ex-Finance Minister Kudrin to head Accounts Chamber: http://tass.com/economy/1003887
anon [228] Disclaimer , May 11, 2018 at 10:28 pm GMT
@Anatoly Karlin

Suppose there were no Russia in Syria, what would have happened? Libya would have been the fate. Most likely US would have recognized Golan Ht as Israel's. Oil harvesting companies would become more visible. Lebanon would have been in flames. Nothing else in ME. Some more terror attacks in EU may be.

But would these have changed the internal dynamics within US ? No It would not. US would still be going down the path it has been and that path would still be what it is today at home and abroad.

Social anarchy, takeover of Democrats by non-whites , takeover of GOP by religious militant and bipartisan tax cutting for pro big business will continue unhindered . Is it good? No. But good for the destruction of the country. That is good . ME without USA would then look like no different until Russia also faces the same fate that has happened to Wiemar Germany and Egyptian/ Persian in the historical past.

ME Shoa will have to wait for few more decades

M7 , May 12, 2018 at 1:14 am GMT
How about Putin showing Bibi what is in store for who harms Russia ? I can see Putin talking in symbols.
jim76 , May 12, 2018 at 1:38 am GMT
on another note after seeing shabas putin next to netanyahu holding picture of a commie terrorist commissar let me say Saker the "ukronazis" have the stalinist russians pegged right thank God they left Russia some hope for a jew free state
https://news.antiwar.com/2018/05/11/putin-backs-off-giving-syria-s-300-systems-after-netanyahu-meeting/

De-escalation!

Realist , May 12, 2018 at 8:19 am GMT
@animalogic

Paul Craig Roberts has repeatedly, for some years now, questioned Putin's apparent willingness to bend over backwards to placate his "partners" in the West.

The problem isn't bending over backward .it's bending over forward.

Realist , May 12, 2018 at 8:22 am GMT
@Momus

Netanyahu is regarded in Washington, and perhaps also Moscow, as almost Churchillian for his efforts to protect Israel and by extension the region and the US.

Protecting Israel does nothing for the US.

El Dato , May 12, 2018 at 11:45 am GMT
https://theintercept.com/2018/05/11/american-saudi-arabia-weapons-deal-yemen-uae/

I wonder what Saudi Arabia and the UAE could want with 60'000 precision-guided munitions?

El Dato , May 12, 2018 at 12:21 pm GMT
Rather OT, but still. Probably worthy of Unz-topping:

The remarkable disappearing act of Israel's car-bombing campaign in Lebanon or: What we (do not) talk about when we talk about 'terrorism'

"With Sharon's backing, terrible things were done. I am no vegetarian, and I supported and even participated in some of the assassination operations Israel carried out. But we are speaking here about mass killing for killing's sake, to sow chaos and alarm, among civilians, too. Since when do we send donkeys carrying bombs to blow up in marketplaces?"

-- Mossad officer, quoted in Ronen Bergman's Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel's Targeted Assassinations

Anomie.

AP , May 12, 2018 at 5:11 pm GMT
@Felix Keverich

Ukrainian president and prime-minister are both Jews

Poroshenko being (half-) Jewish is fake news. Allegedly his father was Jewish and changed his surname. Actually this is his father:

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Порошенко,_Алексей_Иванович

The family originate from a Russian garrison-town on the Romanian border which had been populated by Ukrainians, Russian, Bulgarans, and no Jews.

There is even fake news that Parubiy is Jewish!

Both Poroshenko's parents are ethnic Ukrainians and he is an Orthodox Christian.

All the Ukrainian olygarchs, with the sole exception of Ahmetov, are Jews

Richest people in Ukraine:

Poroshenko -- Ukrainian
Akhmetov -- Tatar
Boholiubov -- Jewish
Tyhypko -- Ukrainian
Korban -- Jewish
Kosiuk -- Ukrainian
Zhevago -Russian
Novinsky -- Russian, major supporter of Russian Orthodox Church
Kolomoysky -- Jewish
Pinchuk -- Jewish
Tymoshenko- 1/2 Ukrainian, 1/4 Latvian, 1/4 Jewish (1/4 Jewish isn't Jewish)

So 4/11 are Jewish.

What is Russia's ratio?

Svigor , May 13, 2018 at 3:03 am GMT

[Interestingly, while whining about "Nazi Iran" Netanyahu did say something truly profound and true. He said "an important history lesson: when a murderous ideology emerges, one has to push back against it before it is too late". That is indeed exactly what most people across the world feel about Israel and its Zionist ideology but, alas, their voice is completely ignored by those who rule over them. So yes, it sure looks to me like it is becoming "too late" and that the consequences for our collective cowardice -- most of us are absolutely terrified from speaking the plain truth about our Zionist overlords - will cost us all a terrible price.]

Add to that the Jews' other genocidal favorites; diversity, multiculturalism, open borders, and anti-nationalism-fur-de-goyim.

Of course, Saker and his fellow cucked "Russian nationalists" don't add them, which is part of the reason that I'm indifferent to Russian nationalists anymore.

Then, of course, there is Donald Trump pulling out of the so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in spite of Iran's full compliance and in spite of the fact that the US does not have the authority to unilaterally withdraw from this multilateral agreement.

Let's just say I'm not taking flatheads' word on this one.

In the meantime, I want to refocus on the Skripal case.

Only took you like a thousand words to get around to the point; congratulations.

Svigor , May 13, 2018 at 3:08 am GMT
@animalogic

This is made all the worse by China's unwillingness to assert itself internationally as the 2nd largest economic power. (As if it can't see the US strategy, via tariffs etc to retard, if not destroy its future economic development)

In reality the US strategy is now to be a bit less than a total globalist-run whorehouse. Which will probably be changed back with the next new president. China's main concern will be internal stability and security for the foreseeable future.

Svigor , May 13, 2018 at 3:13 am GMT
@Momus

Who among us wants horizontal nuclear proliferation and a nuked up Iran armed with ICBM's?

Who among us wants to admit that the ship has kinda sailed, given Israeli and Pakistani nukes?

Biff , May 13, 2018 at 4:58 am GMT
@Momus

Who among us wants horizontal nuclear proliferation and a nuked up Iran armed with ICBM's?

I would rather see Iran with nukes than Israel. The world would be a better place.

jilles dykstra , May 13, 2018 at 6:11 am GMT
One indeed can admire how a few thousand jews wield such power. I consider the rest of jewry as their victims.
But then, why not admire Hitler, he was on his own.
In both cases, disaster struck.

Jews still do not see that the present situation in the USA resembles the Weimar Republic. Henry Ford knew this quite well 'in the end most Jewish enterprises fail through overconfidence'. Possibly the first time was when they were, as is asserted, implicated in the murder of the Roman emperor. Rome twice sent big armies to Palestine. If Rome also invented Christianity to undermine them, it remains an interesting theory.

Daisy , May 13, 2018 at 6:11 am GMT
@Intelligent Dasein

I am inclined to agree with you Putin is smarter and would not/cannot fall for the bait. I believe history will confirm that he will save the human race from total annihilation that we possibly face in months/years to come. I was hoping that Trump would also be a force for good but my view is changing as each day passes. I do not understand the subservient position that the US takes with Israel. Yes there is an aggressive Zionist faction who control America and yes nobody dares speak out against them but there must come a time when enough is enough. Unfortunately if Trump meant it when he said he would drain the swamp he has been prevented from doing so.

Sam J. , May 13, 2018 at 6:55 am GMT
I wouldn't be too hard on Putin. I have a whacked theory that the Jews see the control of the USA slipping. 9-11 was a huge screw up and more and more people know. They had talked of moving to India or China but I don't think that will work. Neither will allow the same stunts they have pulled around Whites. I think the psychopathic Jews are breed to be a parasite on the White Man and it will never work elsewhere. So they're fucked. What can they do? Well if you're a psychopath then the best thing to do would be to start a China/Russia vs. USA nuke war and while this goes on nuke the Europeans, Arabs and maybe a little germ warfare thrown in for good measure. You sit in the middle and hunker down then start over.

Now this may be completely crazy but psychopaths are crazy by most peoples definition and the above is perfectly logical. Maybe Putin doesn't think of it in directly these terms like I laid out but he can't help but notice that these animals are off, a lot. The Jews position gets worse every single day. They will have no luck at all disarming the Americans and the internet, despite their censorship, can;t be completely closed down. Their media platform is failing. No one believes what they say.

We should get rid of the Jews. Peacefully if we can but by any means necessary. Jewish populations upon moving into another territory are in no way distinguishable from a tribe of psychopaths over the long term. No one wants to live with psychopaths.

El Dato , May 13, 2018 at 7:10 am GMT
@Svigor

Let's just say I'm not taking flatheads' word on this one.

Reminder that this is the task of the IAEA.

Which sadly doesn't have the permission to check Israel's nuclear 'nads.

Monty Ahwazi , May 13, 2018 at 7:33 am GMT
Mr Saker,
I agree with your first part of the article and if I may add, Putin is a corrupt capitalist much like his brother in the US, Trump! They do love wealth and power so much that they both are prime targets for corruption by the wealthy Z's. Now that they both have become pawns and subservient to a third party, the Z's are dancing in street for taking control of the 2 superpowers! The one point that I'd disagree with is about your concerns of the 2 super powers having to come closer to a potential military conflict! Since a third party has taken control of the two superpowers the 2 countries are NOT allowed to challenge each other militarily because there's zero or even less than zero benefits for the real people who are in charge!
chris , May 13, 2018 at 9:09 am GMT
@yurivku

It was a real stab in the back for our allies and that's really hard to see.

I definitely see yours and the Saker's arguments in making this point, however, personally, it all looks to me like act 1 of a bigger play. Like Trump, Putin seems to make his concessions up front, but there must, by necessity be a payback concession somewhere down the road; if their allowed survival itself isn't the original concession already.

The nature of the understanding between Russia and Israel, which has not been covered anywhere in the news, must ultimately not be so difficult to determine for journalists investigating it, if such journalists actually existed.

None of them has any interest in covering this, however, because: the west can't deviate from the onslaught of Russian vilification; Russia, doesn't want to show its vulnerabilities and Israel doesn't want to show its power.

But I suspect some of this will come to light as the next phase of operations against Iran.

El Dato , May 13, 2018 at 9:40 am GMT
David Stockman got it:

https://original.antiwar.com/David_Stockman/2018/05/11/the-deep-state-first-madness-on-both-ends-of-the-acela-corridor/

The mere threat of a military attack from the White House is madness because it arises from blatant lies that have absolutely nothing to do with US national security. Nor, for that matter, the security of any other country in the region, including Saudi Arabia and Israel.

The real purpose of the Donald's missile-rattling is nothing more than helping Bibi Netanyahu keep his coalition of right wing religious and settler parties (Likud, United Torah Judaism, Shas, Kulanu and the Jewish Home) together, thereby maintaining his slim 61-vote majority in the 120-seat Knesset.

Netanyahu's malefic political glue is the utterly false claim that Iran is an "existential threat" to Israel because it is hell-bent on getting the bomb.

But that's where the whopper comes in. It amounts to the ridiculous postulate that Iran is so fiendishly evil that if it is involved in the nuclear fuel cycle in any way, shape or form -- presumably even just operating a uranium mine -- it is only a matter of months before it will have a bomb.

As a matter of record, of course, Netanyahu has been saying this since the early 1990s and he has always been wrong because there were never any facts or logic to support his blatant fear-mongering.

But maybe this will blow the top on the economic fiction that's been going on since at leads Greenspan:

And that gets us to the madness at the other end of the Acela Corridor. On a day in which there was no good news whatsoever -- except that defense spending will go ever higher making the impending yield shock even worse -- the stock market rose by another 1%.

There is no mystery as to why, however. Honest price discovery and the discounting of real world information was totally destroyed by the Fed's monetary central planners years ago.

The only thing the casino discounts today is the trading points on the hourly, daily and weekly stock charts, and the presumption that both the fiscal and central banking branches of the state stand ready to "stimulate" whenever a serious breach occurs on the charts.

Nothing could be more mistaken -- and for reasons we will amplify upon in Part 2.

But the spoiler alert is this: The private sector is now swamped under record and unsustainable debt in both the household and business sectors. By succumbing to the most incendiary Deep State meme of all -- the Iranian Nuke lie -- the Donald has now made a public debt catastrophe an absolute certainty.

Pat Pappano , May 13, 2018 at 9:42 am GMT
It looks like a smackdown following the announcement of the superweapons. My thought on Putin's gloating show was why not keep these weaponse developments secret. Once the toothpaste is out of the tube you can't push it back in. One explanation may be that Putin thought he was in charge up to that point, but may have found out differently. I don't know if Russia has a Rothschild central bank. But agreed, it certainly looks bad. Plus Israel has hit Syria again. It all looks very bad.
Rabbitnexus , May 13, 2018 at 10:21 am GMT
@Momus

Don't be ridiculous,. Most of us would trust Iran with nukes even if they wanted them, which they do not, before the Zionist terrorist state. As the Saker said. "How anybody can respect, never mind admire, the Israelis is simply beyond comprehension. I sure can't think of a more contemptible, nasty, psychopathic gang of megalomaniacal thugs (and cowards) than the Israelis. "

ussia's objectives in Syria are not identical to their own? Are they not students of history?

I can only imagine the negotiations that went on in Russia among Netanyahu and company and the Russian government. I'm certain that Russia made assurances that it would not provide S-300 systems. What did Netanyahu have to pay for that? Perhaps assurances that he would stop pushing the Americans to bomb Syrian positions? I don't know. You have an imagination. Think of what Putin wants that Netanyahu could provide.

animalogic , May 13, 2018 at 11:42 am GMT
@Wally

I congratulate Mr Roberts for his courage.
"We must take it on faith alone."
I also agree with all his references to Israel. I loathe people who demand acts of faith (or self induced stupidity)

Iris , May 13, 2018 at 11:45 am GMT
@Pat Pappano

Yours is a very relevant point.

Russia has a national, sovereign, bank , led by a very competent economist, Elvira Nabiulina.

However, Russia's economy is not a match to its military status. Russia's entire GDP is lower than South Korea's, and is only slightly over twice the Pentagon's budget.

I think this is one of the reasons why President Putin must tread carefully: Russia's economy and internal stability are very vulnerable to external economic and financial pressure.

[May 13, 2018] Russia goals in Syria vs Iran and Hezbollah goals

May 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

Frankie P , May 13, 2018 at 11:00 am GMT

@utu

I am a supporter of the Resistance. I support resistance to American hegmony, the idea of a unipolar world with the rest of the nations following American dictates. I support resistance by American citizens against the ideas of American exceptionalism, ongoing foreign belligerence that benefits only the Military Industrial Complex and a certain "shitty little country in the Levant". I support resistance to the Zionist State, the ongoing crimes perpetrated by the Zionists against both the indigenous Palestinians in their own nation and against their neighboring Arab countries. I support American resistance to the stranglehold that supporters of Israel enjoy on the political system in the US.

Therefore, I support actors such as China and Russia in that they are cooperating to balance the unbridled hubris and exceptionalism of my country, providing a balance, a multi-polar future. Iran has become a lynchpin in this geopolitical competition, being positioned smack in the middle of a horizontal (OBOR/BRI initiative) and vertical (Russia's energy cooperation ideas) axis of the future.

I support Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon (Hizbollah) in their desire to remain independent, complete nations while supporting the Palestinians and fighting against the Zionists.

I am not so naive, however, to imagine that all the components of the resistance have similar goals in specific areas, in this case the Syrian situation. It is more than curious to see people saying that Putin "sold out" Syria and Iran. Do you not consider that Putin is acting for the benefit of the Russian nation and Russian interests, and not for the benefit of the rest of the resistance and their program? Do you not realize that without the Russian action in support of the Assad administration, he would certainly have lost his nation, a nation that would currently be a destabilized basket case, a series of fragments falling under control of various Sunnite head choppers, Kurdish militias, and government remnants?

It is important to consider the objectives of the resistance players in Syria, both short- and long-term. Russia's objectives in Syria have been to keep the nation united and integrated, under the control of the current legitimate government until democratic elections can be held at some future date. Russia wants to prevent a radical Sunni movement from threatening its southern flank, sending activists to radicalize the Sunni populations in its Caucasus region. Another more recent objective of Russia in this long-term goal is to keep the Americans out of Syria as much as possible, hoping that the cessation of military action and the return of Syrian government control will lead to removal of all US troops.

The Russian goals do NOT include the destruction of the Zionist State, the return of the Golan Heights to Syria, or the emancipation of the Palestinian people. It is very important to keep this in mind.

The goals of the providers of the boots on the ground that saved the Syrian government, namely Hizbollah, Iran, and the Iraqi Shiite militias, extend beyond the scope of the Russian goals, at least as far as long-term targets are concerned. These players certainly share the Russian goals of shoring up the Assad regime, destroying the Daesh forces, both mercenary and local, and returning Syria to the stable ally that it was. There are more goals for these forces, though, and these goals are clear for all to see.

Hizbollah wants the return of all Lebanese territory to Lebanon. Hizbollah, Iran, and Syria want the return of the Golan Heights to Syrian control. They rightfully see the stabilization of the situation in Syria, the massing of their forces, hardened, battle tested forces, as an excellent opportunity to engage Israel and take back territory.

They realize that the Syrian air defenses are much improved, and although Israel is still able to attack Syrian targets with impunity, there is more risk.

They have made plans and accumulated missiles, accurate, precision missiles that will be able to attack Israeli military positions in the Golan Heights, for example, the IDF electronic surveillance / EW positions on Mt. Hermon. These provide the Israelis with direct line-of-sight to most of the Damascus Plain. What would happen if Syria/Iran/Hizbollah used a precision missile strike to take out the Israeli's eyes, as well as the AD jammers and other equipment? All of these players also want a fair and just solution for the Palestinian people, the recovery of their ability to determine their own future on terms that are acceptable to them. I support these goals. I am not Putin.

Remember, an escalation in military action between the Israelis and the Syrian/Iranian/Hizbollah forces in southern Syria will be viewed by Russia as a greater risk for its own troops, and a greater chance that the US will interfere more forcefully in the country. The Russians want to avoid this. Do I like this? Of course not. Keep in mind my own views, and the forces of the resistance that I said that I support. Do I feel that the Russians sold out thier allies? No way. Do you really think that the generals of the IRGC and Hassan Nasrallah are unaware of the fact that R

[May 04, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis The Skripals survived, but their cat and rodents ... not so much.

Notable quotes:
"... I am reading Taleb's recent book "Skin in the game" which has interesting material about the disconnection between risky behaviors and their consequences in modern USA. He also has a chapter about the mechanics involved in why minority viewpoints in our culture become dominant. It's an interesting read. ..."
"... Finally, the Police partially acknowledged their mistake and accused the Russians of not having been completely fair play. Indeed, these thuriferous bastards of Vlad the Impaler had put poison on the OUTDOOR handle of the front door of the house. It's infinitely subtle of these savages. The Brit Police did not suspect what strong part it had to make, the unexpected thwarting its learned calculations. Presumption, again and again. Nevertheless, the detectives are formal: the Russians did the trick well. The evidence is obvious. In this dramatic case, we are not going to make a comparison between insular and continental logic. The hour is too serious for these trifles. Lots of laughter. ..."
"... It's very difficult in any case to believe that such a notice could have been issued. Can't see why it would be needed. The scripting of the official story on such matters as this seems to be a joint enterprise between the media and the press officers. That's a time-honoured consensus so why would the media need bullying to stay in line? ..."
"... My personal view on all this is that the No. 10 press officers aren't that good at this new-fangled information stuff. They don't seem to have their hearts in it somehow. Time for them to go back to counting paperclips and for information campaigns to be handled by the experts. The BBC have a proven track record in this field and it's time that was officially recognised. ..."
May 03, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Sir Mark, bless him, has told an MP during a committee meeting, that the armed forces, MI-5, MI-6 and GCHQ do not know who or indeed what sickened the Skripals, pere et fille , in Salisbury. He doesn't seem to have mentioned the police. So, basically, pilgrims, Teresa May, the queen's first minister has insistently and incessantly accused the Russians of a crime of which our British cousins know precious little. In a closely related development, it is now revealed that the Britishers sealed up Skripal's house after the poisoning event leaving the black Persian shown above and two guinea pigs to die of thirst and hunger within. It would seem likely that they knew they were doing this since they would have searched the house first. No? Perhaps they thought that the cat might be a threat as a being of possible Iranian descent. This is impressive stuff. pl https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2018-05-01/uk-has-not-yet-identified-skripal-poisoning-suspects


Eric Newhill , 11 hours ago

These false flag ops are all so shabby in their execution. The lack of thoroughness and imagination on the part of the governments running them is really disappointing. For example, if I was running an investigation into the Skripal incident, I would have captured the cat and rodents and run pathology tests on them to see what bio/chem agents might be in their systems. Also, because they might escape and become a vector of further infection. That seems like it would be SOP. So I'd do it even if I knew the story was BS to create the appearance of reality. Then, I could always state that the pets should signs of Russian engineered bio/chem agents. Could even create a video of the pets dying some horrible death due to the agents. That's more better BS.
Threadzilla , 11 hours ago
And yet, this appears to be a lie as well. An earlier piece in the British news claims the pets were taken to Porton Down for examination and testing soon after the incident. Seems more likely they eliminated evidence and then came up with the cover story about how the animals were "forgotten about" and locked in the house for a month, implying totally unimportant for the investigation. http://metro.co.uk/2018/03/...
JohnA , 12 hours ago
I am truly dis-May-ed!

I hope she and Johnson pay the price for this folly. May it be steep! Very. very steep.

How these two suckered so many nations foolishly into sending diplomats home reflected respect for UK policy toward Russia. These nations will need to think long and hard about following any such UK lead in future.

This week, the US took down the Russian flag flying over Russian real estate in Seattle. Shameful!

Sid Finster -> JohnA , 9 hours ago
Sociopaths care nothing for law and everything for enforcement.
Jack , 4 hours ago
I don't know much about the dynamics of British politics but as a light observer of British news I wonder why Theresa May remains prime minister? She became prime minister after the historic Brexit vote. Promptly takes the country to an election and botches it for the Tories. Then bungles the Brexit negotiations. Runs a floundering government. Now comes up with accusations against the Russians in the Skripal affair with no evidence presented but looking more foolish as her story comes under scrutiny.
DH , 11 hours ago
Thirst, yes, hunger, not so much.
Tony , 11 hours ago
I am reading Taleb's recent book "Skin in the game" which has interesting material about the disconnection between risky behaviors and their consequences in modern USA. He also has a chapter about the mechanics involved in why minority viewpoints in our culture become dominant. It's an interesting read.
Sid Finster , 10 hours ago
http://www.theblogmire.com/...
France74 , 10 hours ago
A french view and laughter.

2 cats and 2 guinea pigs were locked up for 9 days in Skipal's house, in the hope of proving that the Russians are guilty.
When the police reopened the house, they found four bodies. the veterinary faculty is positive, both cats died of starvation. Guinea pigs, some say, began to be worked by hungry cats, accelerating their deaths. Unspeakable bloodshed. In this whole case, it's THE revolting detail, among many others. Poor beasts.

Finally, the Police partially acknowledged their mistake and accused the Russians of not having been completely fair play. Indeed, these thuriferous bastards of Vlad the Impaler had put poison on the OUTDOOR handle of the front door of the house. It's infinitely subtle of these savages. The Brit Police did not suspect what strong part it had to make, the unexpected thwarting its learned calculations. Presumption, again and again. Nevertheless, the detectives are formal: the Russians did the trick well. The evidence is obvious. In this dramatic case, we are not going to make a comparison between insular and continental logic. The hour is too serious for these trifles.
Lots of laughter.

kao_hsien_chih , 11 hours ago
Great. There was once a war for Jenkins' ear. I guess we should now have a nuclear war for Skripals' cat.
English Outsider -> kao_hsien_chih , 9 hours ago
Colonel,

There's talk of a D-Notice covering the Skripal affair. Seems unlikely. All concerned were being sat on quite satisfactorily anyway.

I Looked up D-notices on WIKI -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

Presumably there are bigger guns in the background if information that would really threaten national security or the lives of serving officers is in danger of being released. The D-Notice system itself seems to be a more or less voluntary affair -

https://www.theguardian.com...

It's very difficult in any case to believe that such a notice could have been issued. Can't see why it would be needed. The scripting of the official story on such matters as this seems to be a joint enterprise between the media and the press officers. That's a time-honoured consensus so why would the media need bullying to stay in line?

My personal view on all this is that the No. 10 press officers aren't that good at this new-fangled information stuff. They don't seem to have their hearts in it somehow. Time for them to go back to counting paperclips and for information campaigns to be handled by the experts. The BBC have a proven track record in this field and it's time that was officially recognised.

[May 04, 2018] Atlantic Council Explains Why We Need To Be Propagandized For Our Own Good Zero Hedge

Notable quotes:
"... Internet censorship is getting pretty bad, so best way to keep seeing my daily articles is to get on the mailing list for my website , so you'll get an email notification for everything I publish. My articles and podcasts are entirely reader and listener-funded, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , checking out my podcast , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , or buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers . ..."
"... People are not turning to the MSM, they are heading straight to: MoA, ZH, PCR, RT... this is where people now turn to find the truth! The two most frequent, each appearing in six out of seven datasets? ZeroHedge and RT. ..."
"... I have never been a Trump supporter, but IMO the one positive I saw back in the elections is that his character would bring about exactly this loss of trust. Not "He's bad and we can't trust him," so much as the fact that he's polarizing, and will fight everyone, and has inadvertently caused a lot of bad people to expose themselves. ..."
May 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Atlantic Council Explains Why We Need To Be Propagandized For Our Own Good

by Tyler Durden Fri, 05/04/2018 - 19:05 9 SHARES Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

I sometimes try to get establishment loyalists to explain to me exactly why we're all meant to be terrified of this "Russian propaganda" thing they keep carrying on about. What is the threat, specifically? That it makes the public less willing to go to war with Russia and its allies? That it makes us less trusting of lying, torturing, coup-staging intelligence agencies? Does accidentally catching a glimpse of that green RT logo turn you to stone like Medusa, or melt your face like in Raiders of the Lost Ark ?

"Well, it makes us lose trust in our institutions," is the most common reply.

Okay. So? Where's the threat there? We know for a fact that we've been lied to by those institutions. Iraq isn't just something we imagined . We should be skeptical of claims made by western governments, intelligence agencies and mass media. How specifically is that skepticism dangerous?

me title=

Trying to get answers to such questions from rank-and-file empire loyalists is like pulling teeth, and they are equally lacking in the mass media who are constantly sounding the alarm about Russian propaganda. All I see are stories about Russia funding environmentalists (the horror!), giving a voice to civil rights activists (oh noes!), and retweeting articles supportive of Jeremy Corbyn (think of the children!). At its very most dramatic, this horrifying, dangerous epidemic of Russian propaganda is telling westerners to be skeptical of what they're being told about the Skripal poisoning and the alleged Douma gas attack , both of which do happen to have some very significant causes for skepticism .

When you try to get down to the brass tacks of the actual argument being made and demand specific details about the specific threats we're meant to be worried about, there aren't any to be found. Nobody's been able to tell me what specifically is so dangerous about westerners being exposed to the Russian side of international debates, or of Russians giving a platform to one or both sides of an American domestic debate. Even if every single one of the allegations about Russian bots and disinformation are true ( and they aren't ), where is the actual clear and present danger? No one can say.

No one, that is, except the Atlantic Council.

me title=

In an absolutely jaw-dropping article that you should definitely read in its entirety , Elizabeth Braw took it upon herself to finally answer the question of why Russian propaganda is so dangerous, using the following hypothetical scenario :

What if Russia suddenly announced that its Baltic Fleet had dispatched an armada towards Britain? Would most people greet the news with steely resolve in the knowledge that their governments would know what to do, or would constant Kremlin-influenced reports about the incompetence of British institutions make them conclude that any resistance was pointless?

I mean, wow. Wow! Just wow. Where to even begin with this?

Before I continue, I should note that Braw is a Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council, the shady NATO-aligned think tank with ties to powerful oligarchs whose name comes up when you look into many of the mainstream anti-Russia narratives, from the DNC hack to the discredited war propaganda firm Bellingcat to Russian trolls to the notorious PropOrNot blacklist publicized by the Washington Post . Her article , published by Defense One , is titled "We Need a NATO for Infowar", and it argues that westerners need to be propagandized by an alliance of western governments for our own good.

Back to the aforementioned excerpt. Braw claims that if Russian propaganda isn't shut down or counteracted, Russia could send a fleet of war ships to attack Britain, and the British people would react unenthusiastically? Wouldn't cheer loudly enough as the British Navy fought the Russians? Would have a defeatist emotional demeanor? What exactly is the argument here?

That's seriously her only attempt to directly address the question of where the actual danger is. Even in the most cartoonishly dramatic hypothetical scenario this Atlantic Council member can possibly imagine, there's still no tangible threat of any kind. Even if Russia was directly attacking the United Kingdom at home, and Russian propaganda had somehow magically dominated all British airwaves and been believed by the entire country, that still wouldn't have any impact on the British military's ability to fight a naval battle. There's literally no extent to which you can inflate this "Russian propaganda" hysteria to turn it into a possible threat to actual people in real life.

me title=

It gets better. Check out this excerpt:

Such responses to disinformation are like swatting flies: time-consuming and ineffective. But not addressing disinformation is ineffective, too. "Western media still have this thing where they try to be completely balanced, so they'll say, 'the Russians say this, but on the other hand the Americans say this is not true,' They end up giving a lie and the truth the same value," noted Toomas Hendrik Ilves, the former president of Estonia.

I just have so many questions. Like, how desperate does a writer have to be for an expert who can lend credibility to their argument that they have to reach all the way over to a former president of Estonia? And on what planet are these people living where Russian narratives are given the same weight as western narratives by western mainstream media? How can I get to this fantastical parallel dimension where western media "try to be completely balanced" and give equal coverage to all perspectives?

Braw argues that, because Russian propaganda is so dangerous (what with the threat of British people having insufficient emotional exuberance during a possible naval battle and all), what is required is a "NATO of infowar", an alliance of western state media that is tasked with combatting Russian counter-narratives. Because, in the strange Dungeons & Dragons fantasy fairy world in which Braw penned her article, this isn't already happening.

And of course, here in the real world, it is already happening. As I wrote recently , mainstream media outlets have been going out of their minds churning out attack editorials on anyone who questions the establishment narrative about what happened in Douma. A BBC reporter recently admonished a retired British naval officer for voicing skepticism of what we're being told about Syria on the grounds that it might "muddy the waters" of the "information war" that is being fought against Russia. All day, every day, western mass media are pummeling the public with stories about how awful and scary Russians are and how everything they say is a lie.

This is because western mass media outlets are owned by western plutocrats, and those plutocrats have built their empires upon a status quo that they have a vested interest in preserving, often to the point where they will form alliances with defense and intelligence agencies to do so. They hire executives and editors who subscribe to a pro-establishment worldview, who in turn hire journalists who subscribe to a pro-establishment worldview, and in that way they ensure that all plutocrat-owned media outlets are advancing pro-plutocrat agendas.

me title=

The western empire is ruled by a loose transnational alliance of plutocrats and secretive government agencies. That loose alliance is your real government, and that government has the largest state media network in the history of civilization. The mass media propaganda machine of the western empire makes RT look like your grandmother's Facebook wall.

In that way, we are being propagandized constantly by the people who really rule us. All this panic about Russian propaganda doesn't exist because our dear leaders have a problem with propaganda, it exists because they believe only they should be allowed to propagandize us.

And, unlike Russian propaganda, western establishment propaganda actually does pose a direct threat to us. By using mass media to manipulate the ways we think and vote, our true rulers can persuade us to consent to crushing austerity measures and political impotence while the oligarchs grow richer and medicine money is spent on bombs. When we should all be revolting against an oppressive Orwellian oligarchy, we are instead lulled to sleep by those same oligarchs and their hired talking heads lying to us about freedom and democracy.

Russian propaganda is not dangerous. Having access to other ways of looking at global geopolitics is not dangerous. What absolutely is dangerous is a vast empire concerning itself with the information and ideas that its citizenry have access to. Get your rapey, manipulative fingers out of our minds, please.

If our dear leaders are so worried about our losing faith in our institutions, they shouldn't be concerning themselves with manipulating us into trusting them, they should be making those institutions more trustworthy.

Don't manipulate better, be better. The fact that an influential think tank is now openly advocating the former over the latter should concern us all.

* * *

Internet censorship is getting pretty bad, so best way to keep seeing my daily articles is to get on the mailing list for my website , so you'll get an email notification for everything I publish. My articles and podcasts are entirely reader and listener-funded, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , checking out my podcast , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , or buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2


EuroPox -> Bitchface-KILLAH Fri, 05/04/2018 - 19:17 Permalink

BBC, CNN, etc. - they have already lost!

This is a great chart - it shows websites linked from 'false flag' tweets:

https://twitter.com/conspirator0/status/987147903453073409

People are not turning to the MSM, they are heading straight to: MoA, ZH, PCR, RT... this is where people now turn to find the truth! The two most frequent, each appearing in six out of seven datasets? ZeroHedge and RT.

Well done ZH!

techpriest -> Bitchface-KILLAH Fri, 05/04/2018 - 19:19 Permalink

"Well, it makes us lose trust in our institutions," is the most common reply.

I have never been a Trump supporter, but IMO the one positive I saw back in the elections is that his character would bring about exactly this loss of trust. Not "He's bad and we can't trust him," so much as the fact that he's polarizing, and will fight everyone, and has inadvertently caused a lot of bad people to expose themselves.

Why should you trust people who think they have the right to take whatever amount of your money they want, use it for any purpose they want, and also who believe they have the right to harass, torture, stalk, or kill whoever they want, on any pretext they feel like thinking up?

navy62802 Fri, 05/04/2018 - 19:17 Permalink

The Atlantic Council is just another tentacle of the Soros Squid. The man should have been dealt with as a Nazi collaborator in the aftermath of World War 2. Unfortunately for humanity, he evaded accountability for his crimes against humanity during the war.

[May 04, 2018] Media Use Disinformation To Accuse Russia Of Spreading Such by b

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... A McClatchy journalist investigated further and came to the same conclusion as I did. The 'leak' to the New York Times was disinformation. ..."
"... Russia has not pinned the Novichok to Sweden or the Czech Republic. It said, correctly, that several countries produced Novichok. Russia did not blame the UK for the 'nerve gas attack' in Syria. Russia says that there was no gas attack in Douma. ..."
"... The claims of Russian disinformation these authors make to not hold up to scrutiny. Meanwhile there pieces themselves are full of lies, distortions and, yes, disinformation. ..."
"... Wait for an outbreak of hostilities on the Ukraine-Donbass front shortly before the beginning of the World Cup competition which is as internationally important as the Olympic Games -- as they did in 2014 with Maidan and 2016 with the Sochi Winter Olympics drug uproar, the CIA will create chaos that will take the emphasis off any Russian success, since as to them, anything negative regarding Russia is a positive for them. ..."
"... No traces of chemical weapons have been found in Douma. This means that not only the US/UK/French airstrikes were illegal under international law but even their political justification was inherently flawed. Similarly, in the Salisbury affair, no evidence of Russian involvement has been presented, while the two myths on which the British case was built (the Russian origin of the chemical substance used and the existence of proof of Russian responsibility) have been shattered. ..."
"... Given the lack of facts, the Tory leadership seems to be adopting a truly Orwellian logic: that the main proof of Russian responsibility are the Russian denials! It is hard to see how they will be able to sell this to their international partners. Self-respecting countries of G20 would not be willing to risk their reputation. ..."
"... The detail of b's analysis that stands out to me as especially significant and brilliant is his demolition of the Guardian's reuse of the Merkel "quote." ..."
"... Related to the above, consider the nature of the recently christened thought-crime, "whataboutism." The crime may be defined as follows: "Whataboutism" is the attempt to understand a truth asserted by propaganda by way of relation to other truths it has asserted contemporaneous with or prior to this one. It is to ask, "What about this *other* truth? Does this *other* truth affect our understanding of *this* truth? And if so, how does it?" ..."
"... Whataboutism seems to deny that each asserted truth stands on its own, and has no essential relation to any other past, present, or future asserted truth. ..."
"... 1984, anyone? ..."
"... The absurd story that the OPCW says there was a 100gm/100mg who knows which on the door and other sites is just so stupid its painful. ..."
"... Presumably the Skripals touch the cutlery, plates and wine glasses in the restaurant, so why weren't the staff there infected as they must have had to pick up the plates etc after the meal. Even the door to the entrance of the restaurant should be affected as they would have to push it open, thus leaving the chemical for other people to touch. Nope, nothing in this stupid story adds up and the OPCW can't even get the amounts of the chemical right. ..."
"... Biggest problem with the world today is lazy insouciant citizens. ..."
"... One very important point Lavrov made was the anti-Russian group consists of a very small number of nations representing a small fraction of humanity; ..."
"... while they have some economic and military clout, it's possible for the rest of the world's nations to sideline them and get on with the important business of forming a genuine Multipolar World Order, which is what the UN and its Charter envisioned. ..."
"... Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy' disinformation. ..."
"... Yes, exactly. The Western hegemony, i.e. the true "Axis of Evil" led by the US, and including the EU and non-Western allies, have invented the Perpetual Big Lie™. ..."
"... Witnesses? They're either confederates, dupes, or terrified by coercion. Evidence and/or technical analysis? All faked! A nominally reliable party, e.g. the president of the Czech Republic, makes statements that undermine the Big Lie Nexus? Again-- he's either been bought off or frightened into making such inconvenient claims. Or he's just a mischievous liar. ..."
"... And, as I seemingly never get tired of pointing out, the Perpetual Big Lie™ strategy arose, and succeeds, because the "natural enemies" of authoritarian government overreach have been coerced or co-opted to a fare-thee-well. So mass-media venues, and even supposedly independent technical and scientific organizations, are part of the Perpetual Big Lie™ apparatus. ..."
"... Putting Kudrin -- an opponent of de-dollarization and an upholder of the Washington Consensus -- in charge of Russia's international outreach would be equal to putting Bill Clinton in charge of a girls' school. ..."
"... In the Guardian I only read the comments, never the article. Here, I read both. That is the difference between propaganda and good reporting. ..."
May 04, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

The Grauniad is slipping deeper into the disinformation business: Revealed: UK's push to strengthen anti-Russia alliance is the headline of a page one piece which reveals exactly nothing. There is no secret lifted and no one was discomforted by a questioning journalist.

Like other such pieces it uses disinformation to accuse Russia of spreading such.

The main 'revelation' is stenographed from a British government official. Some quotes from the usual anti-Russian propagandists were added. Dubious or false 'western' government claims are held up as truth. That Russia does not endorse them is proof for Russian mischievousness and its 'disinformation'.

The opener:

The UK will use a series of international summits this year to call for a comprehensive strategy to combat Russian disinformation and urge a rethink over traditional diplomatic dialogue with Moscow, following the Kremlin's aggressive campaign of denials over the use of chemical weapons in the UK and Syria.
...
"The foreign secretary regards Russia's response to Douma and Salisbury as a turning point and thinks there is international support to do more," a Whitehall official said. "The areas the UK are most likely to pursue are countering Russian disinformation and finding a mechanism to enforce accountability for the use of chemical weapons."

There is a mechanism to enforce accountability for the use of chemical weapons. It is the Chemical Weapon Convention and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). It was the British government which at first rejected the use of these instruments during the Skripal incident:

Early involvement of the OPCW, as demanded by Russia, was resisted by the British government. Only on March 14, ten days after the incident happened and two days after Prime Minister Theresa may had made accusations against Russia, did the British government invite the OPCW. Only on March 19, 15 days after the incident happen did the OPCW technical team arrive and took blood samples.

Now back to the Guardian disinformation:

In making its case to foreign ministries, the UK is arguing that Russian denials over Salisbury and Douma reveal a state uninterested in cooperating to reach a common understanding of the truth , but instead using both episodes to try systematically to divide western electorates and sow doubt.

A 'common understanding of the truth' is an interesting term. What is the truth? Whatever the British government claims? It accused Russia of the Skripal incident a mere eight days after it happened. Now, two month later, it admits that it does not know who poisoned the Skripals:

Police and intelligence agencies have failed so far to identify the individual or individuals who carried out the nerve agent attack in Salisbury, the UK's national security adviser has disclosed.

Do the Brits know where the alleged Novichok poison came from? Unless they produced it themselves they likely have no idea. The Czech Republic just admitted that it made small doses of a Novichok nerve agent for testing purposes. Others did too.

Back to the Guardian :

British politicians are not alone in claiming Russia's record of mendacity is not a personal trait of Putin's, but a government-wide strategy that makes traditional diplomacy ineffective.

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, famously came off one lengthy phone call with Putin – she had more than 40 in a year – to say he lived in a different world.

No, Merkel never said that. An Obama administration flunky planted that in the New York Times :

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany told Mr. Obama by telephone on Sunday that after speaking with Mr. Putin she was not sure he was in touch with reality, people briefed on the call said. "In another world," she said.

When that claim was made in March 2014 we were immediately suspicious of it:

This does not sound like typically Merkel but rather strange for her. I doubt that she said that the way the "people briefed on the call" told it to the Times stenographer. It is rather an attempt to discredit Merkel and to make it more difficult for her to find a solution with Russia outside of U.S. control.

A day later the German government denied (ger) that Merkel ever said such (my translation):

The chancellery is unhappy about the report in the New York Times. Merkel by no means meant to express that Putin behaved irrational. In fact she told Obama that Putin has a different perspective about the Crimea [than Obama has].

A McClatchy journalist investigated further and came to the same conclusion as I did. The 'leak' to the New York Times was disinformation.

That disinformation, spread by the Obama administration but immediately exposed as false, is now held up as proof by Patrick Wintour, the Diplomatic editor of the Guardian , that Russia uses disinformation and that Putin is a naughty man.

The British Defense Minister Gavin Williamson wants journalists to enter the UK reserve forces to help with the creation of propaganda:

He said army recruitment should be about "looking to different people who maybe think, as a journalist: 'What are my skills in terms of how are they relevant to the armed forces?'

Patrick Wintour seems to be a qualified candidate.

Or maybe he should join the NATO for Information Warfare the Atlantic Council wants to create to further disinform about those damned Russkies:

What we need now is a cross-border defense alliance against disinformation -- call it Communications NATO. Such an alliance is, in fact, nearly as important as its military counterpart.

Like the Guardian piece above writer of the NATO propaganda lobby Atlantic Council makes claims of Russian disinformation that do not hold up to the slightest test:

By pinning the Novichok nerve agent on Sweden or the Czech Republic, or blaming the UK for the nerve gas attack in Syria, the Kremlin sows confusion among our populations and makes us lose trust in our institutions.

Russia has not pinned the Novichok to Sweden or the Czech Republic. It said, correctly, that several countries produced Novichok. Russia did not blame the UK for the 'nerve gas attack' in Syria. Russia says that there was no gas attack in Douma.

The claims of Russian disinformation these authors make to not hold up to scrutiny. Meanwhile there pieces themselves are full of lies, distortions and, yes, disinformation.

The bigger aim behind all these activities, demanding a myriad of new organizations to propagandize against Russia, is to introduce a strict control over information within 'western' societies.

Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy' disinformation.

That scheme will be used against anyone who deviates from the ordered norm. You dislike that pipeline in your backyard? You must be falling for Russian trolls or maybe you yourself are an agent of a foreign power. Social Security? The Russians like that. It is a disinformation thing. You better forget about it.


c1ue , May 4, 2018 2:27:27 PM | 1

Excellent article, in an ongoing run of great journalism.
I am curious - have you read this? https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ST/
It purports to be a book by an American military man intimately familiar with the covert ops portion of the US government. The internal Kafka-esque dynamics described certainly feel true.
Mike Maloney , May 4, 2018 2:44:12 PM | 3
One of the reasons newspapers are getting worse is the economics. They aren't really viable anymore. Their future is as some form of government sanctioned oligopoly. Two national papers -- a "left" and a "right" -- and then a handful of regional papers. All spouting the same neoliberal, neoconservative chicanery.
CD Waller , May 4, 2018 2:57:20 PM | 4
Genuine journalist Matt Taibbi warned of this sort of branding of disparate views as enemy a month ago. He was also correct. Evil and insidious. The enemy of a free society.
chet380 , May 4, 2018 2:58:22 PM | 5
Wait for an outbreak of hostilities on the Ukraine-Donbass front shortly before the beginning of the World Cup competition which is as internationally important as the Olympic Games -- as they did in 2014 with Maidan and 2016 with the Sochi Winter Olympics drug uproar, the CIA will create chaos that will take the emphasis off any Russian success, since as to them, anything negative regarding Russia is a positive for them.
WJ , May 4, 2018 3:02:57 PM | 6
The later history of the 20th century will one day be read as the triumph and normalization of the Nazi state through liberal democratic capitalism.
Laguerre , May 4, 2018 3:07:19 PM | 7
I agree that it's difficult to see how the drive to renew the Cold War is going to be stopped. I presume that, with the exception of certain NeoCon circles, there isn't a desire for Hot War. Certainly not in the British sources you quote. Britain wouldn't want Hot War with Russia. It's all a question of going to the limit for internal consumption. Do a 1984, in order to keep the population in-line.
james , May 4, 2018 3:11:05 PM | 8
thanks b... i can't understand how any intelligent thinking person would read the guardian, let alone something like the huff post, and etc. etc... why? the propaganda money that pays for the white helmets, certainly goes to these outlets as well..

the uk have gone completely nuts! i guess it comes with reading the guardian, although, in fairness, all british media seems very skewed - sky news, bbc, and etc. etc.

it does appear as though Patrick Wintour is on Gavin Williamson's propaganda bandwagon/payroll already... in reading the comments and articles at craig murrays site, i have become more familiar with just how crazy things are in the uk.. his latest article freedom no more sums it up well... throw the uk msm in the trash can... it is for all intensive purposes, done..

mk , May 4, 2018 3:31:41 PM | 9
Meanwhile, OPCW chief Uzumcu seems to have been pranked again, this time by his own staff (this is how I interpret it):

He claimed that the amount of Novichok found was about 100 g and therefore more than research laboratories would produce, i.e. this was weaponized Novichok.

http://www.startribune.com/large-dose-of-nerve-agent-was-used-in-spy-s-poisoning-watchdog-says/481687061/

However, the story is being retracted right now because OPCW staff says it was only 100 mg .

Uzumcu looks like a fool.

b , May 4, 2018 3:49:03 PM | 10
The Russian embassy in the UK must be reading MoA. It just now tweeted this press release: Embassy press officer comments on the Guardian article concerning a new British anti-Russian strategy
Q: What is our reaction to the Guardian article on a "comprehensive strategy" to "deepen the alliance against Russia" to be pursued by the UK Government at international forums?

A: Judging by the publication, the main current challenge for Whitehall is to preserve the anti-Russian coalition that the Conservatives tried to build after the Salisbury incident. This task is challenging indeed. The "fusion doctrine" promoted by the national security apparatus has led to the Western bloc taking hasty decisions that, as life has shown, were not based on any facts.

No traces of chemical weapons have been found in Douma. This means that not only the US/UK/French airstrikes were illegal under international law but even their political justification was inherently flawed. Similarly, in the Salisbury affair, no evidence of Russian involvement has been presented, while the two myths on which the British case was built (the Russian origin of the chemical substance used and the existence of proof of Russian responsibility) have been shattered.

Given the lack of facts, the Tory leadership seems to be adopting a truly Orwellian logic: that the main proof of Russian responsibility are the Russian denials! It is hard to see how they will be able to sell this to their international partners. Self-respecting countries of G20 would not be willing to risk their reputation.

karlof1 , May 4, 2018 3:52:31 PM | 11
Hmmm... My reply to c1ue went sideways it seems. Yes, The late Mr. Prouty's book's the real deal and the website hosting his very rare book is a rare gem itself. Click the JFK at page top left to be transported to that sites archive of writings about his murder. The very important essay by Prouty's there too.
WJ , May 4, 2018 3:53:30 PM | 12
The detail of b's analysis that stands out to me as especially significant and brilliant is his demolition of the Guardian's reuse of the Merkel "quote."

This one detail tells us so much about how propaganda works, and about how it can be defeated. Successful propaganda both depends upon and seeks to accelerate the erasure of historical memory. This is because its truths are always changing to suit the immediate needs of the state. None of its truths can be understood historically. b makes the connection between the documented but forgotten past "truth" of Merkel's quote and its present reincarnation in the Guardian, and this is really all he *needs* to do. What b points out is something quite simple; yet the ability to do this very simple thing is becoming increasingly rare and its exercise increasingly difficult to achieve. It is for me the virtue that makes b's analysis uniquely indispensable.

Related to the above, consider the nature of the recently christened thought-crime, "whataboutism." The crime may be defined as follows: "Whataboutism" is the attempt to understand a truth asserted by propaganda by way of relation to other truths it has asserted contemporaneous with or prior to this one. It is to ask, "What about this *other* truth? Does this *other* truth affect our understanding of *this* truth? And if so, how does it?"

Whataboutism seems to deny that each asserted truth stands on its own, and has no essential relation to any other past, present, or future asserted truth.

Jose Garcia , May 4, 2018 3:56:03 PM | 13
1984, anyone?
john wilson , May 4, 2018 4:03:04 PM | 14
The absurd story that the OPCW says there was a 100gm/100mg who knows which on the door and other sites is just so stupid its painful. This implies that the Skripals both closed the door together and then went off on their day spreading the stuff everywhere, yet no one else was contaminated (apart from the fantasy policeman).

Presumably the Skripals touch the cutlery, plates and wine glasses in the restaurant, so why weren't the staff there infected as they must have had to pick up the plates etc after the meal. Even the door to the entrance of the restaurant should be affected as they would have to push it open, thus leaving the chemical for other people to touch. Nope, nothing in this stupid story adds up and the OPCW can't even get the amounts of the chemical right.

ken , May 4, 2018 4:03:13 PM | 15
The problem is,,, most know it's all BS but find it 'easier' to believe or at most ignore, as then there is no responsibility to 'do something'. Biggest problem with the world today is lazy insouciant citizens. (Yes,,, I'm a PCR reader) :))
karlof1 , May 4, 2018 4:05:15 PM | 16
b @10--

Did you catch the Lavrov interview I linked to on previous Yemen thread? As you might imagine, the verbiage used is quite similar. One very important point Lavrov made was the anti-Russian group consists of a very small number of nations representing a small fraction of humanity; and that while they have some economic and military clout, it's possible for the rest of the world's nations to sideline them and get on with the important business of forming a genuine Multipolar World Order, which is what the UN and its Charter envisioned.

I won't omit linking to Craig Murray's conclusion :

"I cannot sufficiently express my outrage that Leeds City Council feels it is right to ban a meeting with very distinguished speakers, because it is questioning the government and establishment line on Syria. Freedom of speech really is dead."

Ort , May 4, 2018 4:22:35 PM | 17
Anything that may not confirm to the 'truth' as prescribed from above must be overwhelmed with an onslaught of more lies or, if that does not work, be discredited as 'enemy' disinformation.
_______________________________________

Yes, exactly. The Western hegemony, i.e. the true "Axis of Evil" led by the US, and including the EU and non-Western allies, have invented the Perpetual Big Lie™.

This isn't a new insight, but it's worth repeating. It struck me anew while I was listening to a couple of UK "journalists" hectoring OPCW Representative Shulgin, and directing scurrilous and provocative innuendo disguised as "questions" to Mr. Shulgin and the Syrian witnesses testifying during his presentation.

It flashed upon me that there is no longer a reasonable expectation that the Perpetual Big Liars must eventually abandon, much less confess, their heinous mendacity. Just as B points out, there are no countervailing facts, evidence, rebuttals, theories, or explanations that can't be countered with further iterations of Big Lies, however offensively incredible and absurd.

Witnesses? They're either confederates, dupes, or terrified by coercion. Evidence and/or technical analysis? All faked! A nominally reliable party, e.g. the president of the Czech Republic, makes statements that undermine the Big Lie Nexus? Again-- he's either been bought off or frightened into making such inconvenient claims. Or he's just a mischievous liar.

And, as I seemingly never get tired of pointing out, the Perpetual Big Lie™ strategy arose, and succeeds, because the "natural enemies" of authoritarian government overreach have been coerced or co-opted to a fare-thee-well. So mass-media venues, and even supposedly independent technical and scientific organizations, are part of the Perpetual Big Lie™ apparatus.

Even as the Big Liars reach a point of diminishing returns, they respond with more of the same. I wish I were more confident that this reprehensible practice will eventually fail due to the excess of malignant hubris; I'm not holding my breath.

Passer by , May 4, 2018 4:24:44 PM | 18

Is Putin capitulating? Pro US Alexei Kudrin could join new government to negotiate "end of sanctions" with the West.

Former finance minister Alexei Kudrin will be brought back to "mend fences with the West" in order to revive Russia's economy. Kudrin has repeatedly said that unless Russia makes her political system more democratic and ends its confrontation with Europe and the United States, she will not be able to achieve economic growth. Russia's fifth-columnists were exalted: "If Kudrin joined the administration or government, it would indicate that they have agreed on a certain agenda of change, including in foreign policy, because without change in foreign policy, reforms are simply impossible in Russia," said Yevgeny Gontmakher . . . who works with a civil society organization set up by Mr. Kudrin. "It would be a powerful message, because Kudrin is the only one in the top echelons with whom they will talk in the west and towards whom there is a certain trust."

Putting Kudrin -- an opponent of de-dollarization and an upholder of the Washington Consensus -- in charge of Russia's international outreach would be equal to putting Bill Clinton in charge of a girls' school.

It would mark Putin's de facto collapse as a leader. We shall know very soon. Either way, if anyone wondered what the approach to Russia would be from Bolton and Pompeo, we now know: they will play very hard ball with Putin, regardless of what he does (or doesn't do), and with carefree readiness to risk an eventual snap.

https://archive.is/1Ynms#selection-1641.0-1641.66

Formerly T-Bear , May 4, 2018 4:57:25 PM | 21
@ 20 Laguerre

Certainly looks like @ 18 is a fine example of what b is presenting.

A good way to extract one's self from the propaganda is to refuse using whatever meme the disinformation uses, e.g. that Sergei Skripal was a double agent -- that is not a known, only a convenient suggestion.

Military intelligence is far better described as military information needed for some project or mission. Not surreptitious cloak and dagger spying. This is not to say Sergei Scripal was a British spy for which he was convicted, stripped of rank and career and exiled through a spy swap. To continue using Sergei Scripal was a double agent only repeats and verifies the disinformation meme and all the framing that goes with it. Find some alternative to what MSM produces that does not embed truthiness to their efforts.

Peter Schmidt , May 4, 2018 5:08:52 PM | 23
In the Guardian I only read the comments, never the article. Here, I read both. That is the difference between propaganda and good reporting.
Emily Dickinson , May 4, 2018 5:09:00 PM | 24
@Michael Weddington 19

I realize it's from one of the biggest propaganda organs in the world... take this New York Times report of the OPCW's retraction with a 100 grams -- 100mg? -- of salt:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/world/europe/opcw-skripal-attack.html

karlof1 , May 4, 2018 5:12:57 PM | 25
Passer by @18--

This same narrative was put forth in 2016 and is just as false now as then. As I posted on Yemen thread earlier, Putin on 5 May is likely to announce the formation of a Stavka.

Kudrin is a neoliberal and as such is an enemy of humanity and will never again be allowed to hold a position of power within Russia's government. Let him emigrate to the West like his fellow parasites and teach junk economics at some likeminded university.

jalp , May 4, 2018 5:30:35 PM | 26
Anyone seen this reported elsewhere? https://www.rt.com/news/425810-white-helmets-us-funding-freeze/

[May 01, 2018] I'm astonished that anyone would think that Putin doesn't understand the US or what is going on in the Syria theater.

Notable quotes:
"... Israel is annoying everyone in the Syrian theater. Note well that the scale of impact is in the "annoying" range. Kind of like the "bluster" of the US but even more constrained by forces on the ground all around it. ..."
"... No one in the region believes that Russia or Iran have failed at anything. Observers simply hope they have the good fortune to see the revenge, knowing that they may never know how Iran counters - if in fact it ever does. ..."
"... Russia is working to move the final resolution of Syria into political methods rather than military - this is very important to keep in mind with all appraisals of the situation. It's time to repeat that Russia is working for peace, not to win battles. The two efforts are very different, and create different tactics. ..."
"... I echo that feeling. The explosions in Hama and Aleppo, for which there still remains no official report, have kicked up rampant speculation and many strange comments on this site. ..."
"... The idea that Russia is all bluster, has no clue what's going on, has abandoned Syria, or that the whole Russian exercise is due to Putin "begging to be admitted in the Western Club," flies in the face of facts on the ground. ..."
"... Putin is where he says he is. He was already part of the club (G8) and he left because the club was filled with jackasses. Putin is forming his own club, with Xi. ..."
May 01, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Grieved | Apr 30, 2018 9:24:11 PM | 107

Thanks to posters for links to Garrie on a possible "white hat" false flag and to Magnier for a plum-rich storytelling of how Israel is on the losing end of a shift in the balance of power, something that as yet it cannot admit to itself.

Israel is annoying everyone in the Syrian theater. Note well that the scale of impact is in the "annoying" range. Kind of like the "bluster" of the US but even more constrained by forces on the ground all around it.

I'm astonished that anyone would think that Putin doesn't understand the US or what is going on in the Syria theater. Russian commanders are in constant contact with all forces that bear on the situation, including those of the US, and Israel. And Putin has spelled out on numerous occasions - in interviews, from the Valdai Club, from his remarks directly to journalists and his people - what the empire is doing.

No one has lost face in this latest event, except Israel with Netanyahu's inane presentation, currently being called out as empty by Europeans.

No one in the region believes that Russia or Iran have failed at anything. Observers simply hope they have the good fortune to see the revenge, knowing that they may never know how Iran counters - if in fact it ever does.

Russia is working to move the final resolution of Syria into political methods rather than military - this is very important to keep in mind with all appraisals of the situation. It's time to repeat that Russia is working for peace, not to win battles. The two efforts are very different, and create different tactics.

With each situation that Russia confronts, from military attacks to diplomatic property seizures, Russia looks for the peace dividend. Armchair punters are watching one horse race, while Russia is looking decades down the road and asking what it takes to create stability that endures, out of each situation.

Don Bacon , Apr 30, 2018 10:13:44 PM | 113
@Grieved 107

Yes, some don't appreciate the giant step that Putin took moving into Syria to oppose The Leader Of The Free World™ with its president Obama threatening that Russians would soon be going home in body-bags.

But Russia survived and endured, and made a major point that right can win over might.

The strategy was brave and the tactics were revolutionary, including the busing of combatants away from combat. Credit where credit is due, Putin is a winner at home and abroad, as in Syria (and Crimea, BTW).

Activist Potato | May 1, 2018 1:04:41 AM | 123

"I'm astonished that anyone would think that Putin doesn't understand the US or what is going on in the Syria theater." Posted by: Grieved | Apr 30, 2018 9:24:11 PM | 107

I echo that feeling. The explosions in Hama and Aleppo, for which there still remains no official report, have kicked up rampant speculation and many strange comments on this site.

The idea that Russia is all bluster, has no clue what's going on, has abandoned Syria, or that the whole Russian exercise is due to Putin "begging to be admitted in the Western Club," flies in the face of facts on the ground.

Putin is where he says he is. He was already part of the club (G8) and he left because the club was filled with jackasses. Putin is forming his own club, with Xi.

Castellio | May 1, 2018 1:14:02 AM | 125

Putin sees the west much more clearly than the west sees him.

[Apr 30, 2018] They got Putin by the balls with russia histing the Would Cup or something more complex is playing out in Syria and Iran

Apr 30, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Passer by , Apr 30, 2018 3:53:05 PM | 45

Putin blocking the delivery of S-300 in Syria against the demands of the Russian Military

This was discussed by Putin with General Staff chief Valery Gerasimov and Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu on April 20. The Russian military, they told the President, want the go-ahead to deploy S-300 missile batteries to cover Syrian and Iranian forces against US and Israeli attack from the air. They believe Israeli threats to attack the S-300 batteries as soon as they are operational are a bluff which Russia must call if Russia's positions in Syria, and Iran itself, are not to come under subsequent attack from the American-Israeli combination. Testing the threat in Syria, they argue, is the less threatening, less costly option than encouraging the Americans and Israelis to prepare their
offensive against Iran. Putin won't agree.

To respond to Putin's reluctance, the General Staff and the Defence Ministry have devised a step short of the S-300, but with potentially enough defensive power to intercept or deter American and Israeli air attacks. This is the deployment of more Russian electronic warfare systems with the capacity to jam the surveillance, targeting, fire control and command signals on which the attackers rely. It is the Samson Haircut option – deprive the giant of control of his firepower, blind him.

Silently, Putin has decided to protect Deripaska; not to call the US attack on Rusal an act of war; and to test the Americans with an offer of armistice. International bankers close to Russian business believe it is a Russian illusion that an armistice with the US can be anything but temporary; pursuing it is a miscalculation of US intentions, the sources add. They warn that new attacks will come.

http://johnhelmer.net/the-samson-haircut-option-one-step-before-russia-opens-fire-on-american-israeli-forces/#more-19116

Putin Reportedly "Ready For Deep Concessions", Seeks Deal With Trump

He understands Russia can't compete with the West economically and he doesn't plan to go to war with the West.

Kremlin has ordered officials to curb their anti-U.S. rhetoric.

Putin's decision explains why lawmakers Monday suddenly pulled a draft law that would've imposed sweeping counter-sanctions on U.S. companies, two of the people said.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-18/putin-reportedly-ready-deep-concessions-seeks-deal-trump

Russian Senators to soften counter sanctions against US

RBC: Russian senators to water down Moscow's response to US sanctions. Two Federation Council members told the newspaper that the final version of the amendments to the 'anti-sanctions' bill initiated by State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin and leaders of all parliamentary factions, will be "quite mild."

http://tass.com/pressreview/1001647

Russia not to take action against US diplomatic property - diplomat

More:
http://tass.com/politics/1002504

frances , Apr 30, 2018 4:02:55 PM | 48
Passer by | Apr 30, 2018 3:53:05 PM | 45
I believe Putin is playing for time. The March 1 weaponry display didn't include production numbers but I think it is a safe bet they don't exist in sufficient numbers..yet.

So US&Co have a small window left to create hell on earth for as many as possible and they IMO will hit Iran before the football playoffs that Putin so wants to go smoothly.

I would assume Iran is/was responsible for Iranian defense of these sites so I am surprised they didn't respond, maybe there was no time?? Couldn't Russia have warned them?? And does anyone know what weaponry the Russians brought into Syria recently under cover of smoke?

imoverit , Apr 30, 2018 4:20:46 PM | 55
@ frances

I think the World Cup is playing a big role in the decision making as you have said. There is a lot at stake: investments already made and international exposure also. I can't wait for it to be finished so we can get back to war !! (sarc)

karlof1 , Apr 30, 2018 4:45:37 PM | 61
Et al--

Russia began its Syria intervention with an S-400 deployed in Latakia and has introduced several more since, one being in Sept 2017 . Syria also has the BUK-M2E AA system and the Pantsir to go with its older and upgraded S-200 systems along with who knows what else. Just what was off loaded from Russian supply vessels under the cover of smoke last week (don't know if such veiling's continuing)? My guess is more AA systems of the type causing Zionists on both sides of Atlantic to freakout.

As for the Zionists attacking Iranian military bases, those Iran uses in Syria are joint-use with Syria regardless of what's said by Zionists; so, any such attack will need to be aimed at Iran proper. The consequences for the region would be horrible--particularly for Zionists and Saudis: Dimona would be leveled as would Saudi oil infrastructure. The fallout and other pollution would be appalling. If the Zionists want to keep their skin, they'll arrest Nutty before he gets his get-out-of-jail war started.

Zionists know they've lost and are contained and constrained, so they're moving into desperation mode. Too bad they lack the courage to put a pistol to their head and pull the trigger.

Jayhawk2018 , Apr 30, 2018 6:03:45 PM | 78
Russia could easily give Syria the s300 system. But Putin clearly does not want to hurt his buddy Netanyahu's feelings. They are always so chummy you can see there is a mutual respect between them whenever they meet. Russia is only in Syria to fight terrorism. They will obviously not confront Israel and go to war, and that is of course, understandable. But whats even worse is that they seem to refuse to give Syria/Iran the means to defend themselves from Israeli attacks.

If its true Putin is blocking the delivery himself against the request of the Russian Army, that is even more shameful. I guess in terms of preventing a World War, it is good that Putin is chummy with Netanyahu. However a regional war is looking very likely at this point. Unfortunately the only way Israel will learn is by being smashed in the teeth. I'm sure in time Syria, Iran or Hezbollah will have to teach them another lesson.

Pft , Apr 30, 2018 6:50:46 PM | 81
A lot of Russian oligarchs are dual Israeli or American -Russian citizens. Even in the Soviet era while they provided just enough support to prevent the Arab countries from being totally defeated they stopped short of giving them enough to threaten Israel or defeat them. Putin has made peace with a number of the oligarchs that remain in Russia but he has to take care not to get the pro Israeli -US faction riled or threaten their overseas financial interests which Trump has threatened to do with sanctions targeted at the oligarchs

So Russia will prevent Syria from being totally overwhelmed but concede the US the northeast oil rich fields and Israel gets the gas fields in Golan. They will allow isolated missile attacks and bombing by US and Israel that both resort to for show to appease their hawks. In the meantime if Assad has an accident or gets overthrown due to economic reasons then israel and US may get their puppet state and Russia/Iran may exit. Then on to Lebanon and Iran.

Wars are not fought to be won anymore. They are fought to be long lasting. Perpetual War Abroad is Peace at Home

[Apr 29, 2018] Putin and Russia bashing is indeed perplexing. But it is not universal

Notable quotes:
"... BraaaaVO! Killer post....Ironically, at age 57, I NOW do what Russians TOLD ME they did over 30 years ago: Whatever I read in the papers or hear from the U.S. gov, I automatically believe the OPPOSITE! ..."
Apr 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Dan Good 4 years ago ,

The Russia bashing is indeed perplexing. But it is not universal. One explanation is that Americans are afraid of the rivalry. Also Americans have been brought up with a negative imagine of "KGB" and it is impossible to shake this. Russia would love to be part of Europe and increase ties and business. Europe is game; but not USA. It represents a challenge to its own supremacy. I think this is the underlying problem. Putin came out of nowhere, as many of the "Putin Videos" show. His first priority was to rebuild the morale of the Russian army and to do this he picked on Chechnia. Perhaps today he would do things differently. He also turned on many oligarchs who had helped him. But he did this because he did not ask nor want their "help" which he considered self-serving; they wanted to control him, not the other way round. He may regret having been too hard on some (Boris Bereshovski for instance) but it had to be done. All these things played into the hands of the anti-Russians in US. One thing is sure. Neither Russia nor Putin had anything to do with the riots in Maidan which are the root cause of all the disasters occurring in that country. If Putin "took advantage" of the break-down in Kiev to retake Crimea so much to his credit. It was certainly not "planned". The State Dept got faked out. Now they are licking their wounds by Putin bashing day in day out. Rather pathetic really. The best would be to welcome Russia into the world economy. It can make a great contribution.

Patty Donovan Dan Good 4 years ago ,

I was brought up to hate Russia, to fear Russia but not anymore! It was all lies and manipulation! Do not include all Americans because its just not true but yes, Russophobia is from decades and decades of brainshing in America.. Believe me, since literally the age of 5 I was taught to fear Russia.

From school drills in preparation of " Russia coming to get us" to Putin being a communist dictator to now, Russia is more dangerous than terrorists organization is ALL lies by our government and media! People need to wake the hell up !

It is our government bombing and invading countries, our government funding millions to Isreal to slaughter Palestines, funding Nazi Ukraine president to kill Russian speaking E Ukrainians!

Our government funded and trained ISIS! The world is not n chaos because of your government!

Samantha Dan Good 4 years ago ,

Well, Washington D.C. IS afraid of rivalry.
Remeber the 1992 ,Wolfowitz Doctrine'? Even one of the mouthpieces, the NYT, was slightly disgusted.
The essence of that vile doctrine: do not allow any rival to rise and challenge US power, hegemony.

Patty Donovan Guest 4 years ago ,

I am not at all afraid of Russia. In fact they're much like us , who want peace and wished our countries were friends and allies like we should be ! But NO ! We have twisted butthead warmongers who want to cause trouble and keep Russia down because heaven forbid they might be bigger and better than us! I say good for them ! We are NOT excepectionals , we should be equals !

Luketree14 Patty Donovan 3 years ago ,

Totally agree, Patty

plamenpetkov Guest 3 years ago ,

Guess what, the Russians are not afraid of USA either.

But we all ARE afraid of a wounded animal, they are the most dangerous. And USA is a wounded dying animal. I will be very surprised if humanity managed to avoid a nuclear war within the next 10 years. The fake "capitalism" is collapsing and the only way out is a major war.

teddyfromcd plamenpetkov 2 years ago ,

IMO -- WHAT the americans among us are saying "'not afraid of russia\|"

is that they don't fear Russia the WAY the warmongers told them to fear Russia...

as if russians have some malicious nefarious intent towards americans...and they are right. americans should NOT fear russia nor russia americans in the sense that everyone are just PEOPLE -- ordinary folks who just want to grow up , live, have families and friends and work a good decent job, leave something for their children , etc..and then grow old with grace .

buit these warmongers of leaders are just so EVIL - who sit around with their cronies and their families and friends SCHEMING and makng their 'inner circle" decisions about 'shaping the world" as they see fit...and create MISERY for everyone.

Luketree14 plamenpetkov 3 years ago ,

quote: "The fake "capitalism" is collapsing and the only way out is a major war."

No, as it is implied in your statement, a major war is not a way out. What is a way out, is a reinventing of a new economy!

plamenpetkov Luketree14 3 years ago ,

There is nothing being implied into my statement. "Capitalism" has ALWAYS been fake and bunch of lies. With a major war, they will be able to keep the charade a bit longer, the same way thy did it with WWII.

Jacques Cuse Luketree14 3 years ago ,

Venus Project? https://www.thevenusproject...

teddyfromcd Dan Good 2 years ago ,

exactly

brilliant summation.

EUROPE and its ''invasion" by the USA is the USA'S STEPPING STONE and war front towards Moscow n order to rule over all of Eurasia -- all that resource and land, magine...

it is just a mirror of the USA'S ''conquering the west" ..by the other direction. as is JAPAN, peripeheral asian countries to china /russia is from the pacific end...

THAT'S really teh USA''s obsession - always was - and this has been OPENLY declared by no less than the likes of THEODORE ROOSEVELT, "the pacific shall be ours, the philippines shall be our doorstep and forever ours - and then on to the mainland of asia"...things of that kind...

no less than MANIFEST DESTINY to rule the world, or "OUR SOUTH AMERICAN BACKYARD"..

and were russia and europe to unite and have peaceful cooperation , trade, friendship and tighten their commonalities of cultures --

WHAT WOULD EUROPE AND EURASIA really need THE usa FOR?

DEFENSE AND SECURITY against WHOM exactly? a europe at peace with russia would SOON be a europe at peace WITH the middle east and africa -- and asia --

and the extremists would SO ISOLATED within that landmass they would simp;ly wither away for STARVATION as peoples ignore them

people who find meaningful decent jobs , children growing up with families intact and with futures to look forward to and travel everywhere their dreams allowed...etc...

WHAT WOULD the landmasses and their peoples and cultures NEED USA for? resources? technology? science? medicine/ / agriculture? food? ships? cars? .......security? defense/ ?

safety? rights? entertainment? cultural enrichment? stories? friends? nope

they would NOT NEED the USA at all. the wil.l welcome american FRIENDS and traders as it ought to be...but NOT as rulers and ''security and defense " SCAM ARTISTS.

THAT'S WHAT THE USA FEARS from russian/european integration...and become what it really IS..

AN OUTSIDER.

Jonathan Jarvis 4 years ago ,

look at all the blogs/comments in Uk nationalistic papers eg Daily mail-readers comments are full of vile nonsense and insane idiocy-there is no hope of peaceful resolution Rus and west while ordinary people are so ill informed, do not even wish to understand, completely prejudiced, have such entrenched attitudes perpetuated by mass media, playstation/xbox games and zombie films exported from USA that have morally corrupted peoples and nations.

NGO's being funded by USA to subvert other states, look out for cyberwarfare too.

Please support The Saker too, very high intelligence from this analyst.

Rocky Racoon 4 years ago ,

Just consider the speech's given by Western Leader's at the opening session of the UN recently -- Cameron posits critical thinking as being aligned with ISIS-Obama casting Russia as a threat equal to ISIS and Ebola

Rocky Racoon 4 years ago ,

Just consider the speech's given by Western Leader's at the opening session of the UN recently -- Cameron posits critical thinking as being aligned with ISIS-Obama casting Russia as a threat equal to ISIS and Ebola, ...these statements are allowed to pass uncritically into the mainstream without a second thought. This depraved leadership sends shivers down my spine as it indicates just serious our problems are and how far down the rabbit hole we have fallen. Capitalism in crisis produces fascism at home and primitive accumulation in the form of Imperialism abroad. America is broke and going from Broke having invested trillions in PNAC they are doubling down on full spectrum dominance-a fallacy that will never be reached leaving poverty stricken societies in their wake. Societies akin to the Hunger Games-quasi-feudal fiefdoms only serfs had more rights than today's wage slaves-tenure on the land,access to the mode of production ability the keep and trade the fruits of their labour at least to an extent. The fall of the Soviet Union was a catastrophe for the workers of the world-Not only did we not get a peace dividend from the end of the cold war but a century of social gains won by labour have been rolled back to practically nothing the finishing touches being put into place with the free trade deals about to be unleashed upon the Western Worker-notice austerity was and is not an option for Putin's Russia-he has put his neck on the line for his people and his country and they will do the same for him and the Motherland.

America has to hire mercenaries to fight their battles which is why they can't win. And these false flags are getting a little tiresome. And Mr. Lavrov as FM he is the consummate diplomat, he does not brow beat or chest pound,nor does he humiliate his adversaries even though circumstances have offered him ample opportunities-people like MCCAIN OBAMA and KERRY embarrass themselves and their nation often enough without Russia having to add insult to injury-Russia is above that but truth telling is another matter and must be pursued no matter how embarrassing for certain parties the exercise maybe Russia does need to increase it's public relations budget every thing from student exchanges on up to film festivals Sochi would make an excellent venue for the glitterati......and serves as a reminder of just how immature the West truly is when one harken's back to the coverage of the Olympics. This Ukraine situation needs to be resolved in opposition to the fascists putsch ruling now before it blows up in all of our faces. Cohen nailed it-we are 5 min. to midnight and closing.

Our real enemy is not in the Kremlin or the Middle East-but right here on Wall Street and Pennsylvania Avenue-time for Occupy 2.0 with Agenda.

Webbily Rocky Racoon 4 years ago ,

Yes, and Ebola isn't a real threat. The only reason it's in the US is because people have been idiots and have not taken the proper precautions. Russia has a vaccine ready to go. ISIS was created by the US, and they're not a real threat. I am not afraid of Russia or the KGB or Putin or Boris and Natasha. All of it is fear, fear, fear, fear, fear.

elizabeth Eva Young Rocky Racoon 4 years ago ,

Oh Yes, and not forgetting the hybrid not so Holy Hollywood, the entertainment industry who of course are run by the Banksters. The missing link in humanity the genetic modification from apes to human form, the Banksters. Do you remember the "Man from Atlantis" and the "Planet of the Apes" and the oil magnets "Dallas"
https://encrypted-tbn1.gsta...
Play Hide

idiotland • 4 years ago ,

What this shows more than anything is how desperate the western elites are. They know Russia, China and others are rising powers and that the US empire's days are numbered. The dollar's reign as world reserve currency is coming to an end and they know that the US a busted, bankrupt economic house of cards that could completely collapse at any time taking down US power with it. Hence, the risk taking and recklessness. We're in a very dangerous time.

elizabeth wesley 4 years ago ,

It just takes a few to manipulate the minds of public opinion and perception. That is mind control and you have to ignore mainstream media and go online to find unadulterated truth. Putin has other means to deal with the US; he doesn't have to stoop so low to call obama what he really is: an illegitimate child who became an illegitimate president, a man who came from nowhere and has nothing to offer but war with third world nations who have no nuclear defense. America is as confused as Africa and his zionist handlers like it that way.

Webbily 4 years ago ,

Listen up, Russia! If you would just get your borders away from our military bases, that would be great.
Love,
Amerika

astoriava 4 years ago ,

The basic problem is, and always will be, that people believe what they want to believe irregardless of facts, evidence, proof or common sense. The believe that which they think will benefit themselves, soothe their ego, fill their pockets, bring tem pleasure etc and deliberatly ignore, condemn, and close their eyes to learning something that may not fit that goal. They rationalize away their deliberate ignorance and refuse to look for truth under some morally relative "label" or "cause" so that they don't have to face truth about themselves and their true intentions.

Rose-Marie Mukarutabana 4 years ago ,

The Valdai Speech is on the "President of Russia" website - or at least three quarters of it, with the rest still being translated from Russian: http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/...

Draft Resister 4 years ago ,

Seriously, should this question even be asked? Of course intelligence agencies are trying to destabilize Russia.

Dragos • 4 years ago ,

The Economist is the voice of the british oligarchy and security services. They don't need to be advised by the CIA, because the English oligarchy is dictating US politics and strategy.

Incredulously Yours, Dragos 2 years ago ,

It's the voice of the R O T H S C H I L D S .....

plamenpetkov 3 years ago ,

Is the Pope Catholic? Do you even have to ask? After almost 25 years of documented USA lies against Iraq/Iran do we even have to discuss this?
documented USA/NATO lies that have been proven to be lies:
1990 babies taken out of incubators and left to die on cold hospital floor
1990-1999 Saddam working on nuclear weapons
2001 Osama engineered and did 9-11
2001-2003 Saddam has ties with Ali Queda
2001-2003 Saddam has weapons of mass distraction (Colin Powell, Bush jr, Cheney, Condy Rice, etc)
2002-2203 Saddam working on weapons of mass distraction
2002-2003 Saddam working on acquiring nuclear weapons
2001 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2001 Iran has ties with Ali Queda
2002 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2003 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2004 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2005 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2006 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2007 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2008 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2009 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2010 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2011 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2012 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2013 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2013 Assad gassed his own people (part 1)
2013 Assad gassed his own people (part 2)
2014 Iran will have nuclear bomb
2014 Assad gassed his own people (part 3)

Incredulously Yours, plamenpetkov 2 years ago ,

BraaaaVO! Killer post....Ironically, at age 57, I NOW do what Russians TOLD ME they did over 30 years ago: Whatever I read in the papers or hear from the U.S. gov, I automatically believe the OPPOSITE! Auto-freakin'-matically.....works like a chahm...

Benjamin Netanyahu 4 years ago ,

A very interesting professionally made video of the entire Valdai speech of the President of Russia (24 Oct 14) along with all the pointed questions asked of him by the Russian, Bulgarian, Palestinian, English, and American audience, and his complete answers to these, can be found at the "Vineyard of the Saker" site (h t t p : / / vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/... .

tiredofthemedialies • 3 years ago ,

Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin?

No!! Fancy that!! Where have you been for the last 3 years? and why bring it up now? The CIA has been waging full-spectrum media warfare, propaganda, dis-information and covert destabilisation of Russia and the Russian president for many years. (What do you think they are paid for? making tea?)

Er, um • 3 years ago ,

It's just a coincidence that we chosen people own and run Newsweek, The Economist, The Daily Express, The Daily Mirror, The New York Times, The New York Post, The Washington Post, News International (The Sun Newspaper, Sky News, Fox News), The Independent, The London Evening Standard, the Los Angeles Times, The San Francisco Chronicle, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, Bloomberg News, and Reuters. And run the BBC.

It's just a coincidence, goyim. Nothing to see here. Move along. And keep thinking what we tell you to think.

Jeremy Bourbon 3 years ago ,

Russia is establishing a BRICS development bank and consequently becoming a threat to the IMF and WB, this is why the global eite want Putin removed and a puppet regime put in place.

Luketree14 3 years ago ,

It's also good to remember that this has been going on for years and years, and in spite of that, Pr. Vladimir Putin kept offering his friendship, insisting on the importance of collaboration, equal terms, exchange, peace, and even disarmament ! For years and years !

Soarintothesky 3 years ago ,

Considerable Ukrainian money has gone into influencing US, EU and Israeli press and politicians ($12m to the Clinton foundation gets Hilary's attention). It is not necessary to invoke the CIA.

The remnants of Mockingbird work for defense institutes in Estonia, Universities in Azerbaijan and think tanks in Poland. It is not necessary to invoke the current US government. One thing fascinates me. Every year or so there is yet another negative biography of Putin. I do not believe the market is so big. Beresovsky started it - his cousin wrote the first one and claimed P had $40Bn without any evidence whatsoever. Did he fund the others too (there hasn't been one recently).

EVcine 3 years ago ,

To our German friends on here I say...isn't it weird that no one is allowed to say the word "reunification" for Crimea and Russia
I do not recall a referendum for the DDR citizens.

deliaruhe 3 years ago ,

Germany and most other EU countries are merely assisting in their own decline. Any country -- including mine -- that insists on continuing to play the role of vassal to Washington will enjoy the same fate that Washington is stupidly preparing for itself. The German government has to have a few screws loose to join Washington in driving Putin into the arms of the Chinese -- and taking his natural gas resources with him. Don't be surprised if Germans freeze in the dark this winter.

CassandraSays 3 months ago ,

It goes on day and night in Russia, although that doesn't exclude an American origin.

There is no defamation of Putin that is not screamed from the rafters by the Russian liberati. The allegations of corruption, photoshopped pictures of Putin with women who can be found by an image search in the same pose and clothing embracing somebody else, the whole nine yards.

rosewood11 2 years ago ,

First off, I say this as a former bookseller, who spent major amounts of time shelving the magazines and newspapers. Newsweek is all but dead. Put a fork in it, it's done!!! I didn't know The Economist was a Rothschild publication until someone on here pointed it out. I did know, however, that most people consider it one of the most manifestly boring magazines on the planet. Finally, as regards the British tabloids shown and the American ones that didn't get mentioned, they are for people who have a little mind and a little time. My favorite one was The Weekly World News, now sadly gone. I know it transgressed the bounds of good journalism, but now I'll never know what became of "Bat Boy," the pregnant mummy (the museum janitor did it!!!) or the 12 US Senators who are actually space aliens. (Now, I know they're lying. There's way more than 12 of them!!!)

That said, when I see headlines like the ones shown here, I ignore them. Newsweek discredited itself long ago, and this presidential election cycle has done much in America to do the same for Big Media and both political parties. That's what made my family start listening to alternative media, and thank God for the Internet!!! The truth about Mr. Putin is out there for anyone who cares to look. I've had to work hard to convince a friend of Ukrainian descent that he's not the one screwing up their homeland, but they are beginning to question. I've also shocked several people out of their socks by telling them Mr. Putin is a devout Christian man. So far, I've found about 3 people out of 30 or so I've told this who had any inkling. And one of them is a pastor who won't tell his congregation!!!

The Russian people have a good leader. Would that America had one at least half as capable. Until then, follow the old adage: "Don't believe anything you hear, and only half of what you see!!!"

teddyfromcd 2 years ago ,

IS THE CIA an american organization ? is it and the USA gov a ''legalized" criminal empire organization?

the answer to both is YES... therefore the answer to the question on impugning putin and russia is - YES.

Kjell Hasthi teddyfromcd 2 years ago ,

There is a black defence budget on the level on the official one = not American money
(CAI agent told it. He had cancer and id not care about doing anything "unlegal" by telling it)

sepheronx 2 years ago ,

Why bother asking this question now? Russians are fully aware, so is nearly everyone else. Hence why even with this defemation campaign, Putin hold far more popularity than nearly anyone else. The others who hold popularity are equally against the US and others (Fair Russia Party, Communist, etc). Only ones that sing the grace of US BS, Yabloko and other "liberal" parties/people, are 3%'ers. In other words, hated amongst majority of their population.

The thing about all these media campaigns that the west tries and does, which the Saker failed to state, is that they do not work. Essentially, all it will do is rally the Russians against others. As the newspapers love to demonize Putin, it is all written in English with few actually being translated. And when it does, it ends up as a laughing stock of the country. As well, it is barely working here. Yes, there are a few useful idiots around, we even see them on the comment sections here, but lets be frank - even westerns do not believe it. But if their intention is to destabilize Russia, then they are clearly not working. Putin's popularity back in 2011 was 65%. Now it is over 80%. Clearly, the west is doing him more favors than not.

If he ever even loses popularity, and someone else wins, guarantee it will either be the communists or the nationalists (fair russia). And that is when the west will be dealing with people who are going to make sure they go out of their way to hurt the US.

Helen 3 years ago ,

Al western media is a propagandamachine for the american elite.We who read alternative media admire Putin and see him as mankinds biggest hope.

Webbily Guest 4 years ago ,

Clearly it's Putin who has bombed six countries in seven years...or is it seven countries in six years. Whichever. He isn't bombing sovereign nations, and deciding that recognized leaders in sovereign states are the latest incarnation of Hitler and thus need to be sacrificed to the god Pele.

idiotland Igor 4 years ago ,

He's a colossal scumbag for not doing what Washington says. He actually thinks that Russia should be sovereign country outside of the influence of the "exceptional" and "indispensable" nation. What a loser!

Webbily idiotland 4 years ago ,

Igor is missing his drunk pal Boris.

Jack Bluebird 2 years ago ,

Gorbachev is a traitor and dumbest person ever to walk this planet. The only thing that is unbelievable is the fact that everyone are buying into "american dishonesty" story when it is purely visible and understood that no one with a fraction of a brain would ever allow something of this magnitude to happen.( allowing Germany the country that wanted to obliterate Russia and USSR not even 50 years ago at that point ) to reunite based on verbal agreement. He should have been shot in the head the moment he landed back in the USSR for giving such approval without consultaing in detail Soviet Army generals and KGB directors.

People stop drinking KoolAid and open your eyes. gorbachev sold the whole USSR for few private "foundations".

May he rot in Hell forever.

astoriava Guest 4 years ago ,

Do you unquestionably believe everything you are told to believe or can you start someday to think for yourself and look for logic, facts, evidence, multiple and oppositional sources of information and well founded deduction to make your decisions?

Webbily Guest 4 years ago ,

What war has he started? What terrorists has he supplied weapons with? What minorities is he oppressing. Oh, d'ye mean the gays? You obviously haven't spent much time in the USA if you think everyone here is open-minded about homosexuality. Maybe in the cities on the coast but in the small towns of the rest of middle America, they are pretty conservative about that issue and openly so. I've met my fair share of homophobes in my lifetime and none of them were from Russia. I would say 50 percent of Americans disapprove of homosexuality, and attitudes have only changed somewhat in the past 10 years. All of those gay marriage bans were passed by voters, even in so-called "progressive" states like California, as recently as 2008. You think you can't get your butt beat for being gay in the United States? You think there aren't any anti-gay laws here? You think the anti-gay propaganda law in Russia is actually enforced? Sure, they could have a different attitude toward that sort of thing, but so could a lot of people. If someone is gay and is that concerned about their safety, stay out of Russia the same way you'd stay out of Utah. You're a person who thinks it's a human right to stage a gay pride parade, but if some idiot "girls" walk into a church and make fun of someone's religious beliefs, well they should be celebrated as heroes.
Who did he threaten to nuke? Got proof of that? I mean proof, not hearsay. Do you have a voice recording of Putin threatening to nuke people?
Stop calling him Putler. His brother was killed by the Nazis. You are ignorant. You must be confusing Putin with our current president, Obomba, and our last prezzident, Bushwacker.

Stop Bush and Clinton 3 months ago ,

Another problem that needs to be fixed is their control over schools and universities.

An aspiring journalist who went through a lot of effort translating a Putin speech and commenting on it, then getting an F while watching the lazy guy sitting in the class next to him getting an A+++ for writing "Putin's speech translates to 'We'll steal Ukraine because we hate democracy. Heil Hitler! Death to America!' (and any other translation you may see is Russian propaganda, Russia controls the media worldwide), therefore we need to strengthen NATO and move troops directly to Russia's border to fight off that threat" probably learned the lesson before even starting his job.

Anthony Justice 2 years ago ,

I'm British and the more the media attack Mr Putin the more I trust him! I think if Britain was involved in an altercation with Russia the public would not back it. People in the West feel very down trodden at the minute and if Britain doesn't leave Europe I think democracy will be questioned! It's time to live and let live and help each other instead of interfering, for me Mr Putin plays a good game and seems to be more realistic than our politicians, who knows but people across the world want peace and it's about time we demanded our governments stopped interfering. Every country has it's problems and could sort them out if they weren't too busy interfering over seas! War is horrific and must be avoided at all costs but greed will always motivate war. Someone invent a non-greedy pill please😀

ArnieLerma 2 years ago ,

The US Secret Government hates PUTIN as much as they HATED JOHN F KENNEDY.

Shahna 2 years ago ,

There is one little item the author is missing. The USA regards Russia and China as "existential threats to the USA" because they are existential threats to the USA. Without it's world hegemon and tight control on global trade, the US crumbles and fades away. Russia and China are slowly but surely, bit by bit, taking them away. Existential threat.

All living things, even empires, fight for their survival.

Shahna 2 years ago ,

"Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin?"
-------------------
On no. Every word the CIA says is true. Simple - it's true because they said it! American logic.

legal eagle • 2 years ago ,

"Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin?" Do bears poo in the woods ?

stevor 2 years ago ,

to attack the leader of a country is to attack the country? No, I don't think so. In the case of o'bama, to attack him is to HELP the country get out from under a LYING SCUMBAG FRAUD and to go back to following the Constitution!

Dennis De Jarnette 2 years ago ,

The magazine cover lamenting the spies that run Russia caused me to chuckle. George Bush I ran the CIA.

AMHants 2 years ago ,

Yes, but is it working?

There are many who believe the MSM and take what they say as Gospel, but there are also many that have woken from the zombie, media induced diet of the MSM and they are voicing their concerns and also given a different type of narative to counterbalance the MSM and that is also working.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."? William Casey, Director of CIA

How much money is the CIA, US, EU and Soros investing in their media disinformation programme? It is quite frightening when you look at the figures involved. Why do they need to do so?

This article goes back to 2011, I wonder how far it stretches in 21016?

Soros-Funded Lefty Media Reach More Than 300 Million Every Month... http://www.mrc.org/commenta...

Ironically, the more the MSM goes into a media frenzy with a story, I now always question the motives and reasons why and then completely dismiss the story.

http://rense.com/1.imagesH/...

http://www.isaiahexplained....

Vierotchka Dewey Olsen 2 years ago ,

That's an extremely convoluted, circumlocutory and long-winded way of saying "History repeats itself"....

[Apr 29, 2018] Is the CIA Running a Defamation Campaign Against Putin by The Saker

Notable quotes:
"... ( Editors Note : Operation Mockingbird was a CIA program started in the 1950s to influence the US media, which was gradually exposed by investigative journalists starting in the late 60s, culminating in sensational televised congressional hearings in 1975 which shocked the nation, forcing the program's termination. Critics maintain that the same tactics have continued since, under different programs. Wikipedia ) ..."
"... nowadays a reporter is either unemployed or a prostitute ..."
Apr 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

The latest hot topic in the Russian media. Russian politicians are talking about it. Historical precedent and behavior of Western media suggests that they are. The Saker Fri, Apr 22, 2016 | 52,080 195 MORE: Politics A major topic in the Russian media is mystification with how Putin is portrayed in the Western media.

Wildly popular at home, and seen as a decent, modest, an admirable person, and Russians don't understand how there can be such a disconnect with Western impressions.

Recently, leading Russian commentators and politicians have been suggesting that this can only be explained by a deliberate campaign to defame Putin, by governments or other groups.

Yesterday, at a briefing to foreign journalists, Sergey Ivanov, Putin's chief of staff, arguably the 2nd most powerful man in Russia, spoke of an "information war" consisting of "personal attacks" on Putin.

The western media hit a new low...
The day before another member of Putin's inner circle, Vyasheslav Volodin, made similar remarks , telling foreign journalists "an attack on Putin is an attack on Russia." The logic, they argue, is that by defaming the leader of a country, you weaken his power domestically by undermining popular support for him, and internationally, by rallying popular opinion to support policies against that country. The ultimate goal, they argue, is to weaken the country itself. They also talk about regime change. They argue that if one looks at the facts, that there is evidence of ongoing character assassination which cannot be explained by a vague popular zeitgeist in the West, but is more likely the result of a dedicated effort to introduce this defamation into the news flow.
Newsweek has been one of the most virulent Putin-bashers for years
The issue of manipulation of news by intelligence services has been in the news recently with revelations that the CIA and German Secret Service (GSS) have long-running programs to influence how media executives and top journalists convey and interpret the news, including direct cash payments. Here are some examples they point to: RI sat down with The Saker , a leading analyst of Russia in international affairs, and asked him what he thinks:

-----------------------------------

So, is there any credence to this line of thinking, or is this conspiracy theorists running wild?

There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that the US is waging a major psyop war against Russia, although not a shooting war, for now, and that what we are seeing is a targeted campaign to discredit Putin and achieve "regime change" in Russia or, should that fail, at the very least "regime weakening" and "Russia weakening".

And the Economist has been the very worst of them all...

So this is a US government program?

Yes, Putin is absolutely hated by certain factions in the US government two main reasons:

1. He partially, but not fully, restored Russia's sovereignty which under Gorbachev and Yeltsin had been totally lost Russia then was a US colony like Ukraine is today and,

2. He dared to openly defy the USA and its civilizational model.

a free and sovereign Russia is perceived by the US "deep state" as an existential threat which has to be crushed. this is a full-scale political assault on Russia and Putin personally.

So what the Russians are saying, that the constant personal attacks against Putin in the global media are partly the result of deliberate efforts by US intelligence services, basically, planted stories

Yes, absolutely

It seems like "Operation Mockingbird" all over again Are you aware of other instances aimed at Putin?

( Editors Note : Operation Mockingbird was a CIA program started in the 1950s to influence the US media, which was gradually exposed by investigative journalists starting in the late 60s, culminating in sensational televised congressional hearings in 1975 which shocked the nation, forcing the program's termination. Critics maintain that the same tactics have continued since, under different programs. Wikipedia )

Yes, of course. Since this defamation has very little traction with the Russian public Putin's popularity is higher than ever before .., there is an organized campaign to convince them that Putin is "selling out" Novorussia, that he is a puppet of oligarchs who are making deals with Ukrainian oligarchs to back-stab the Novorussian resistance

So far, Putin's policies in the Ukraine have enjoyed very strong support from the Russian people who still oppose an overt military intervention

but if Kiev attacks Novorussia again - which appears very likely - and if such an attack is successful - which is less likely but always possible - then Putin will be blamed for having given the Ukrainians the time to regroup and reorganize.

Warm and fuzzy...

So you are saying that if the Ukrainian military strengthens its position enough to deliver a serious blow to the East Ukrainians, the US can use this as a method to strike at Putin's support base

Yes, that's right ... t here are a lot of "fake patriots" in Russia and abroad who will reject any negotiated solution and who will present any compromise as a "betrayal". They are the "useful idiots" used by western special services to smear and undermine Putin.

Is it limited to government special ops, or are there other groups who might have an interest in doing this?

Yes, well here is something that most people in the west don't appreciate there is a major behind-the scenes struggle among Russian elites between what I call the "Eurasian Sovereignists" (basically, those who support Putin) and what I call the "Atlantic Integrationists" (those whom Putin refers to as the "5th column).

The western media talks about this as the struggle between Russian liberals and conservatives, reformers and reactionaries, right?

Well its sort of like that, but not exactly

The former see Russia's future in the Russian North and East and want to turn Russia towards Asia, Latin America and the rest of the world, while the latter want Russia to become part of the "North Atlantic" power configuration.

The Atlantic Integrationists are now too weak to openly challenge Putin - whose real power base is his immense popular support - but they are quietly sabotaging his efforts to reform Russia while supporting anti-Putin campaigns.

Regarding the revelations of CIA activities in Germany, do you think this is going on in other countries, in the US?

I am sure that this is happening in most countries worldwide. The very nature of the modern corporate media is such that it makes journalists corrupt.

As the French philosopher Alain Soral says " nowadays a reporter is either unemployed or a prostitute ". There are, of course, a few exceptions, but by and large this is true.

This is not to say that most journalists are on the take. In the West this is mostly done in a more subtle way - by making it clear which ideas do or do not pass the editorial control, by lavishly rewarding those journalists who 'get it' and by quietly turning away those who don't.

If a journalist or reporter commits the crime of "crimethink" he or she will be sidelined and soon out of work.

There is no real pluralism in the West where the boundaries of what can be said or not are very strictly fixed.

Ok, but is it like what has been revealed in Germany, similar specific operational programs in France, the UK, Italy, Latin America, etc.

Yes, one has to assume so – it is in their interests to have them and there is no reason for them not to.

As for the CIA, it de-facto controls enough of the corporate media to "set the tone". As somebody who in the past used to read the Soviet press for a living, I can sincerely say that it was far more honest and more pluralistic than the press in the USA or EU today.

Joseph Goebbels or Edward Bernays could not have imagined the degree of sophistication of modern propaganda machines.

If the US is doing it, can't one assume other governments are too? Are the Russians doing it against western leaders?

I think that all governments try to do that kind of stuff. However, what makes the US so unique it a combination of truly phenomenal arrogance and multi-billion dollar budgets.

The US "deep state" owns the western corporate media which is by far the most powerful media on the planet. Most governments can only do that inside their own country ... to smear a political opponent or discredit a public figure, but they simply do not have the resources to mount an international strategic psyop campaign. This is something only the US can do.

So foreign governments are at a great disadvantage in this arena vis-a-vis the US?

Absolutely. MORE:


Johnpd Guest 4 years ago ,

Excellent. Another point to grasp is that the Banksters do not want a true capitalism, where inefficiency fails, & competition trims profits.
They want what we now have in the West : a crony corporatist state, where ever fewer giant globalist multinationals dominate both commerce & countries, pay no taxes, to the benefit of their CEOs , shareholders & their banksters.
In short, effectively, a Fascism.
Book : Pawns in the Game, by William Guy Carr. See where those "Atlantic Integrationists" came from.

FullDisclosure Guest 4 years ago ,

Russia today is the only power standing up to the world oligarchy. If Russia falls then we will all be living as slaves behind a barb wired fence, with chips under our skin, etc. etc.

Webbily Guest 4 years ago ,

Yes, and Russia has actually been making efforts to keep the dollar afloat, because they know the US hegemons will get even nastier of their precious dollar becomes worthless. Their goal isn't to integrate Ukraine into the EU. They want to create a failed state on Russia's border, and also hopefully engage them militarily in Syria and in places like Chechnya.

spin to win Guest 3 years ago ,

I've heard tell...Russia's central banking institution does not belong to the state. Does this sound familiar? I do not believe that the international banking system give two turds about the affairs of Russia, unless...Russia moves to control it's own central bank, then there would be real war.
Bankers have no allegiance except to money

Yonatan spin to win 2 years ago ,

It is headed by Chicago-school wannabes who follow the dictates of a banking system aimed at preversving the US banks at the expense of their onw country's economy.

Nabuliana (sp ?), the head of the Russian CB, knows she is on borrowed time but still keep favoring the US over Russia.

dixi3150 Guest 3 years ago ,

The say a rat that is cornered can be very viscous, that's the US.

AMHants dixi3150 2 years ago ,

What is it they also say about dying Empires. The US did not retain Empire status for long, when you look at Russia and China, they are just a toddler on the block?

Incredulously Yours, dixi3150 2 years ago ,

Oh? Violent too....

Иван Guest 3 years ago ,

Very interesting perspective.
I'm very curious to hear western comments on Russian conspiracy theories that Fed already owns Russia and current straggle is a straggle for independence. It seems wild but for people who view Federal Reserve Bank as a direct enemy of humanity it doesn't seem very far-fetched.

sixpack Иван 2 years ago ,

WHEN PUTIN WAS ELECTED PRESIDENT of Russia in 2000, Russia was bankrupt. The nation owed $16.6 billion to the Rothschild-run International Monetary Fund while its foreign debt to the Rothschild-controlled Paris & London Club Of Creditors was over 36 billion dollars.

But Putin took advantage of the current boom in world oil prices by redirecting a portion of the profits of Russia's largest oil producer Gazprom so as to pay off the country's debt. The continual surge in oil prices greatly accelerated Russia's capacity to restore financial sovereignty.

By 2006 Putin had paid off Russia's debt to the Rothschilds. Russia's financial dependence on the Mafia financiers was now over. I doubt they've gotten another hold since then.

wilmers13 Guest a year ago ,

You need to understand that President Putin's divorce is a private matter. In the Anglo World they stick their nose into these private matters but in Russia they do not. Who knows; there have been people who got divorced so the spouse would not cop it in the event of big problems. They even got married again later on. The Anglo World is also dumb, always behaving as if the removal of ONE man would cure something, e.g. Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad - nah. Or take Myanmar; if only the lady (whose name I cannot spell) would rule the country, everything would be fine. Nah - she's extremely racist and will not utter the name of one tribe 'Rohingyas'.

There is definitely a campaign against Russia and President Putin. For Germany it's the

Atlantik-Brücke which steers the press, in Australia the Australia-American Leadership Dialogue, something else in the other countries, just like the late Brian Crozier masqueraded as a journalist but was CIA funded. The campaign needs to be ignored although it is really peculiar that Bush Sr. was fine as CIA chief, and Putin as KGB officer was not. I'ts just the usual American double standards.

Shahna Guest 2 years ago ,

(I think) .... Putin's divorce is not yours to wonder about or criticise.
'Sides, he said, at his last Q&A, he gets on better with his ex now than he did when he was married. That should be good enough for you.

teddyfromcd Guest 2 years ago ,

I THINK the time has come for RUSSIA to play HARDBALL with teh us gov and cia, nsa. etc...

and that is to OPENLY , REPEATEDLY -- RIGHT AT THE LEVEL OF UN AND INTERNATIONAL FORUMS - RIGHT INTO any ''talks" between EU/WEST/ and relations with other nations

always INCLUDE , INSERT -- part of discussions -- teh CIA/US GOV /ENTITIES

attempts against russia.

MAKE IT very prominent that it can NOT be ignored no matter what the USA TRIES...

in order to puit FRONT AND CENTER in the world the attention on THE CIA.

don't let it remain ''incidental" topic to ''major issues"

rather -- make it A CENTRAL topic in every instance and keep throwing t at the USA so that all international meetings ALWAYS bring up

\
USA/CIA - USA,/CIA -- sabotage -- oh yet again another CIA operation in macedonia, oh another one in cnetral asia...etc....

let us remember --

2 cia emplyed ''pschiatrist/psychologists" who took care of the ''methodology" of CIA TORTURE are right now being sued in a US court that is forced to open hearings -- on the suit by former tortured detainees...

the PORTUGUESE AMERICAN woman - SOUSA -- is ordered to appear in an ITALIAN COURT to face her charges for conspiracy to kidnap, rendition , torture the arab/italian citizen

more and more will come, that is inevitable and the CIA ought to be BROUGHT BEYOND just ''topic of discussion" --but as the DEEP STATE that it is -- out into the open -- calling out, searchng out its operatives, officers, policy makers, amerifcan officials -- that' sort of thing...and the only way to do that is make it a WORLD GLOBAL CAUSE TO BRING UP in all matters of international governance and relations -- in press conferences...assemblies, treaties, etc...

Guest • 4 years ago ,

I just want to point out that German media is worst, because Germans need the most convincing to go to war with Russia. The western media now has to combat the anti-war tendencies they propagated onto Germans ever since the end of WW2. If you read the comments on all these anti-Putin propaganda articles, you can tell that Germans hate their own media for doing so.

Lisa Guest 3 years ago ,

Hey, I`m from Germany (Stuttgart), and i can definitely say, that we Germans hate our media and get the informations we need from the Internet. Angela Merkel do what Obama says to her and we can do nothing. if we go to the street and make a Demonstration they say we are nazi or the media say nothing. many People (the old People) in Germany hate Putin and belive the lies from the media, but we, the young people dont belive the lies. We love Putin and wish Angela Merkel will be a little bit like Putin.

dixi3150 Lisa 3 years ago ,

I'm also German (Lahr, Schwartzwald) and totally agree. NEVER watch German TV. It is like for imbeciles. Cooking, singing, festivals everything to keep us from thinking for ourselves. I also get all my info from sites like this one and many others. Love Putin and think Ouma Merkel sold out to the US.

Martin Alfven Haider dixi3150 3 years ago ,

Sounds like American tv. But without all the series about serial killers, violence and perversion. What they have done to us and our collective psyche here is sick, and demonic.

teddyfromcd Martin Alfven Haider 2 years ago ,

but this is not just a problem IN america -- germane TV as some of our friends here have said - getng shallower -- IS A PART of the ''influence" of american ''way\" ..

to bring up mostly and primarily shallow past-times...that takes up LIFE HOURS...when you really count it,,,

ONE shallow pastime after another...the WORST imo,,,apart from these silly ''reality shows\" (which ARE copied throughout the world unfortunately in that desire to be ''more american" -- even in CHINA ) -

are these ''game shows" -- trivia shows..that used to be just CHILD'S play n the backyard and really is where they OUGHT to stay so children can be children...

but NATIONAL CULTURE? trivia shows? give me a BREAK!

but that's exactly what americana brings to societies..the HIGHLIGHTING AND GLORIFICATION OF SILLINESS and SHALLOWNESS as a NATIONAL ETHOS.

and a sure-fire way of turning out , reshaping and ''winning hearts and minds" by making them exposed - without choice really -- to ''the only games in town"

SILLY LITTLE GAMES that 'TRAIN the mind to become STUPID".

this - THIS is the great TRIUMPH of the american society over the world. where everything -- even WAR -- is now ''entertainment" - to be ''packaged" - promoted sold, and switched around like cotton candy by the powers that be...and deeper critical thought -- or honest simplicity of thought and discourse is ''NOT ALLOWED".

Seán Murphy dixi3150 a month ago ,

You should see the satellite TV aimed at Britain and Ireland....

[Apr 29, 2018] The entire Liberal narratives around Vladimir Putin and Alexander Dugin are actually political reconstructions of the "Yellow Peril" stereotype

Notable quotes:
"... The entire Liberal narratives around Vladimir Putin and Alexander Dugin are actually political reconstructions of the "Yellow Peril" stereotype of the evil Asian who schemes to conquer the west, a viscous racist caricature straight out of the old dime magazine pulps. ..."
"... Originally Putin was depicted by liberals as merely a fiendish Asian criminal mastermind. After he finally started responding to the endless provocations, he became the terrible Fu Manchu, leader of a secret society of assassins, always plotting to destroy the west. Next to him is Alexander Dugin, a diabolical eastern sorcerer and leader of a fanatical sect. ..."
"... These sterotypes are 100% racist, and of the kind of brutal American "Yellow Peril" racism that justified both the mass internments of the Japanese in concentration camps and the nuclear genocide of two civilian cities. ..."
Apr 29, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Akira Kalashnikov 2 years ago ,

The entire Liberal narratives around Vladimir Putin and Alexander Dugin are actually political reconstructions of the "Yellow Peril" stereotype of the evil Asian who schemes to conquer the west, a viscous racist caricature straight out of the old dime magazine pulps.

Originally Putin was depicted by liberals as merely a fiendish Asian criminal mastermind. After he finally started responding to the endless provocations, he became the terrible Fu Manchu, leader of a secret society of assassins, always plotting to destroy the west. Next to him is Alexander Dugin, a diabolical eastern sorcerer and leader of a fanatical sect.

Now (straight out of a Fu Manchu plotline) Putin is supposedly plotting to install his puppet as president of the United States.

These sterotypes are 100% racist, and of the kind of brutal American "Yellow Peril" racism that justified both the mass internments of the Japanese in concentration camps and the nuclear genocide of two civilian cities.

[Apr 29, 2018] NEO - The Simple Truth of Vladimir Putin's Diabolical Plan by Phil Butler

Notable quotes:
"... "We believe that at the very least we should wait for the results of the UN inspection commission in Syria. I've already said I find it absolutely ridiculous that [Syrian] government's armed forces, which today are actually on an offense mission and in some regions have already encircled the so-called rebels and are finishing them off, that the Syrian army has used prohibited chemical weapons." ..."
Apr 29, 2018 | www.veteranstoday.com

In the New York Times last week, veteran reporter Neil MacFarquhar reminded us Vladimir Putin's "fight" with the West is isolating Russia. The Middle East expert's latest Russia hate also interpolated that the woeful isolation is failing to deter Putin. But what is it that Putin is fighting against? What is the so-called "West" trying to deter him from? Better still, where is the evidence of his cunning plan to destroy all?

I do not know why, but to my knowledge, no one has ever asked these simple questions. Here we are in a new and bitter Cold War, and nobody I can name has any reasonable explanation of what the fight is about.

There are allegations by the truckload. There's sanctions, proxy wars, terrorists scattered, CIA money spent, dignitaries tossed out on their ears, and ten thousand news outlets screaming "Putin foul" – but over what? You can't answer because it's all over nothing. Here's a brief history of the real crimes of Vladimir Putin.

In the early 2000s, Vladimir Putin was running a country almost destroyed by corruption, foreign interventions, and pirates bent on privatizing anything of value for western investors. The advance of the globalist doctrine had reached the borders of the country; wars were brewed in former Soviet republics where regime changes and color revolutions were not working.

The notorious Russian mob, the Israeli mob, anybody inside the country that could be bought by western pirates was taking a bite from the Russian legacy. Putin stepped in and sorted it out. Putin did not sell Russia out. This was a capital crime.

Later in the decade, Vladimir Putin proposed an initiative known as the "Vladivostok to Lisbon" protocol. The plan was for one gigantic Eurasian market worth tens of trillions of dollars. The plan was for a full and fair integration of Russia within the global context. Only the plan made Russia an integral partner rather than a network of small banana republics like Yugoslavia became.

The Putin plan would have assured almost unbreakable cooperation, prosperity, and peace. But the suggestion of such a thing to the existing world order was a heinous crime.

When 2009 rolls around and the world's fascination with then Prime Minister Putin grows. The New York Times back then questioned the Russian leader's work ethic. Western media reported Putin singing "Blueberry Hill" and playing the piano. And the Washington Post begins the rail about "Putin, the killer." Then in 2010, the heat was turned up.

US newspapers began the "huge protest" gambit, Putin the arch criminal became all the rage. The Vladimir Putin legend began to grow during this time. Rumors and speculation became the flavor of the day. Then in 2011, the Russian leader went so far as to criticize the West for the Libya regime change. And we all know how Libya turned out.

Starting in 2012 the mainstream media in the West began predicting the downfall of Vladimir Putin. The Economist titled its prediction. "The beginning of the end of Putin." So much for deep economic analysis and forecasting. It is in this year that Masha Gessen gets the big headlines for labeling Vladimir a "crime boss" and a homophobe.

Meanwhile, the real criminals like Mikhail Khodorkovsky gather steam for the lies and mudslinging to come. NPR and other corporate owned media get readers by labeling Putin a "street thug" and etc. But Putin won the election that year anyhow. And even though The Slate labeled him "Putin the pitiful," he somehow managed the biggest country in the world skillfully. Pussy Riot defiles a Russian Orthodox Church snagging some jail time, and down the rabbit hole we go.

Then in 2013 the world's biggest ever arch villain commits the ultimate sacrilege. At the moment then President Barack Obama is gathering his forces to invade Syria, Russia's leader pecks out a plea to the American people in the New York Times.

Then, on the eve of a fateful vote in the US Congress on Obama's decision to launch strikes against Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, Putin mediates by instigating a proposal for Syria to surrender all chemical weapons.

This was too much for the gilded world order; the gloves had to come off. Meanwhile, Obama and his CIA had already created the proxy war against Assad. But the American people were never told.

Funny isn't it, how overt Putin moves are eviler than covert killing by America? But Russia's leader became the alchemist of truth, look at his words of warning on alleged gas attacks back then:

"We believe that at the very least we should wait for the results of the UN inspection commission in Syria. I've already said I find it absolutely ridiculous that [Syrian] government's armed forces, which today are actually on an offense mission and in some regions have already encircled the so-called rebels and are finishing them off, that the Syrian army has used prohibited chemical weapons."

Almost a year passed until I first learned of the "hell bent" onslaught on anything attached to Vladimir Putin and Russia when the 2014 Sochi Olympics rolled around. The bristling gay globalists had no intention of letting the Russia people welcome the world to their country. Putin had to pay for his past daring.

So, Russia bashing took on a whole new meaning. Bad sportsmanship was also redefined when a people created a showpiece and an unparalleled spectacle, only to be insulted and criticized at every turn. Dog packs, unworking toilets, gay skier hunts, unfinished hotels, an environmental catastrophe once again wrought by our ghastly arch villain. The world order taught Putin a lesson in those days. "Mess with us, and we'll piss on your parade."

This was the message. Then the Euromaidan and an illegal regime change in the midst of an Olympics forced diabolical Putin's hand again. Instead of allowing Russia's most strategic position in the southwest to be taken over by NATO, he instead chose to secure it without firing a shot. Crimea should have been seeded to the global hegemony – but Putin dared to resist. For shame.

Since 2014 Vladimir Putin has been blamed for the downing of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 and without a smidgen of proof. He's had the gall to ask the world order "Do you even realize what you have done?" And this, before the mighty United Nations and in front of God and everybody else. Our crystal ball at The Economist proclaimed "Putin declares war on the West," and we believed them.

He revealed the United States was backing terrorism in the Middle East, and then he televised his forces destroying ISIS. In 2016 NBC News proclaimed; " US Officials: Putin Personally Involved in US Election Hack ." Amazingly, no pictures of Putin using his laptop to hack the DNC emerged.

And the people of the world failed to notice the lack of evidence. For nearly two years now the world has investigated Putin over alleged tampering in the US election. Can you guess what body of evidence has been shown officially or in the media?

Damn that Putin for being so flawless and diabolical a villain! His utter control of every evil deed on planet Earth is being hidden from us. And oh, so skillfully that armies of brilliant private eyes, investigative journalists, whistleblowers, think tanks, the CIA, the NSA, MI6, GCHQ, Mossad, the Pentagon, Naval Intelligence, Senate committees, or even David Copperfield can turn over one leaf of evidence.

This, my friends, is Putin's greatest delinquency against humanity. He is guilty as sin of the real delinquency, the sin of ancient logic. The reason there we cannot see proof of Putin's misdeeds is stunningly simple.

There is no proof.

Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he's an author of the recent bestseller " Putin's Praetorians " and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine "New Eastern Outlook."

[Apr 24, 2018] Class and how they use words to hide reality

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... For example, when a Republican talks about "freedom" they don't mean "freedom from want". They mean "freedom from government oppression", but only government oppression. ..."
"... Democrats act the same way about different things. When a Democrat says "diversity", they only mean diversity of race, gender, or sexual orientation. Diversity of ideas? Diversity of class? Not so much. When a Democrat says "privilege" it refers to "white" and "male". Privilege of wealth? (i.e. like the dictionary definition) That generally gets forgotten. ..."
"... -- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW) ..."
"... @thanatokephaloides ..."
"... -- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW) ..."
"... @longtalldrink ..."
"... @longtalldrink ..."
"... @Lily O Lady ..."
"... @Lily O Lady ..."
"... @longtalldrink ..."
"... @lizzyh7 ..."
"... @dkmich ..."
Apr 24, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

gjohnsit on Wed, 04/18/2018 - 11:45pm

I've come to realize that there's a lot of confusion out there due to people using words with very specific definitions.

For example, when a Republican talks about "freedom" they don't mean "freedom from want". They mean "freedom from government oppression", but only government oppression.

Private oppression? Republicans will either deny it exists, or justify it. When a Republican is "pro-life" it only refers to birth. Because those very same pro-life people are generally pro-war and pro-death penalty.

Democrats act the same way about different things. When a Democrat says "diversity", they only mean diversity of race, gender, or sexual orientation. Diversity of ideas? Diversity of class? Not so much. When a Democrat says "privilege" it refers to "white" and "male". Privilege of wealth? (i.e. like the dictionary definition) That generally gets forgotten.

And then there is the bipartisan misuse of words, which revolves around war and wealth.
When they say "humanitarian war" they mean, um, some contradictory concepts that are meaningless, but are designed to make you feel a certain way.
When they say "socialism" they really mean "state oppression" regardless of the economic system.
As for the many version of socialism with minimal or non-existent central governments? Or when socialist programs work? No one talks about them.

Let's not forget substituting or mixing up "middle class" for "working class".
"Working class" now equals "poor", which isn't right.
They use "working class" as a smear too.
When you say "working class" some people automatically insert certain words in front of it, as if it's generally understood.

When many hear discussion of outreach to "working class" voters, they silently add the words "white" and "male" and all too often imagine them working on a factory floor or in construction. They shouldn't. According to another analysis by CAP from late last year, just under 6 in 10 members of the working class are white, and the group is almost half female (46 percent).

The topic of the needs and interests of the working class is usually race and gender neutral. Only the dishonest or indoctrinated can't wrap their minds around that fact.This is important because working class values don't require a race or gender lens.

a new report released today by the Center for American Progress makes a convincing argument, using extensive polling data, that this divide does not need to exist. As it turns out, in many cases, voters -- both college educated and working class, and of all races -- are in favor of an economic agenda that would offer them broader protections whether it comes to work, sickness or retirement.
"The polling shows that workers across race support similar views on economic policy issues," said David Madland, the co-author of the report, entitled "The Working-Class Push for Progressive Economic Policies." "They support a higher minimum wage, higher taxes on the wealthy, and more spending on healthcare and retirement. There is broad support among workers for progressive economic policy."

This shows that it's possible to make economic issues front and center in a campaign platform in a way that doesn't just talk to working class whites and dismisses the concerns of female and minority voters. It also shows that the oft-discussed dilemma among Democrats -- whether to prioritize college educated voters or working class ones -- may be a false choice.

Propaganda is all about false choices. To accomplish this, the media has created a world in which the working class exist only in the margins .

With the working class largely unrepresented in the media, or represented only in supporting roles, is it any wonder that people begin to identify in ways other than their class? Which is exactly what the ruling class wants .

I can't believe I used to fall for this nonsense! It takes a stupendous level of cognitive dissonance to simultaneously celebrate the fortunes of someone from a specific identity while looking past the vast sea of people from said identity who are stuck in gut-wrenching poverty. We pop champagnes for the neo-gentry while disregarding our own tribulations. It's the most stunning form of logical jujitsu establishment shills have successfully conditioned us to accept; instead of gauging the health of the economy and the vitality of our nation based on the collective whole, we have been hoodwinked to accept the elevation of a few as success for us all.
Diversity has become a scam and nothing more than a corporate bamboozle and a federated scheme that is used to hide the true nature of crony capitalism. We have become a Potemkin society where tokens are put on the stage to represent equality while the vast majority of Americans are enslaved by diminishing wages or kneecapped into dependency. The whole of our politics has been turned into an identity-driven hustle. On both sides of the aisle and at every corner of the social divide are grievance whisperers and demagogues who keep spewing fuel on the fire of tribalism. They use our pains and suffering to make millions only to turn their backs on us the minute they attain riches and status.

It's only when you see an article written by the ruling elite, or one that identifies with the ruling elite, that you realize just how out-of-touch they can be. The rich really are different - they are sociopaths. They've totally and completely bought into their own righteousness, merit and virtue .

Class ascendance led me to become what Susan Jacoby classifies in her recent New York Times Op-Ed "Stop Apologizing for Being Elite" as an "elite": a vague description of a group of people who have received advanced degrees. Jacoby urges elites to reject the shame that they have supposedly recently developed, a shame that somehow stems from failing to stop the working class from embracing Trumpism. Jacoby laments that, following the 2016 election, these elites no longer take pride in their wealth, their education, their social status, and posits that if only elites embraced their upward mobility, the working class would have something to aspire to and thus discard their fondness for Trump and his promises to save them.

That level of condescension just blows my mind. It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil, or Russia, than I do with the wealthy elite in my own country. Don't think that the wealthy haven't figured that out too.

Pricknick on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:03am
Condescension.

That is the only word you need pay attention to.
I am inferior therefore expendable.
How the lofty will fail. They will succumb to those who are lessor in their minds.
Nice post gjohn.

Wink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 4:11pm
And posted as a pod,

sort of, at... Patreon.com/C99
@Pricknick

That is the only word you need pay attention to.
I am inferior therefore expendable.
How the lofty will fail. They will succumb to those who are lessor in their minds.
Nice post gjohn.

thanatokephaloides on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:13am
the working class and the employing class have nothing in common

It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil, or Russia, than a do with the wealthy elite in my own country.
Don't think that the wealthy haven't figured that out too.

The working class and the employing class have nothing in common.
There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among
millions of the working people and the few, who make up the employing
class, have all the good things of life.

-- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW)
source

QMS on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 8:17pm
over generalized

@thanatokephaloides I have been a worker and an employer for most of my career. I associate with many of the same ilk. None of us working / employer types can afford to hire the millions of under employed. Maybe a few here and there. We are not wealthy, nor are we taking advantage of the poor. Try to put this lofty idealism into perspective.

It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil, or Russia, than a do with the wealthy elite in my own country.
Don't think that the wealthy haven't figured that out too.

The working class and the employing class have nothing in common.
There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among
millions of the working people and the few, who make up the employing
class, have all the good things of life.

-- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW)
source

earthling1 on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:18am
Their heads will look real fine

on a pike.

Meteor Man on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:30am
The Working-Class Push for Progressive Economic Policies

Somebody at CAP may be out of a job. I tried to find the report and came up empty. Can you provide the link? Thx.

The Aspie Corner on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 7:56am
But 'Murica is a classless society..../s

My ass. Class was a huge factor in 2016 (And still is) and working class issues were utterly ignored.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/-jjrSWCgJus?modestbranding=0&html5=1&rel=0&autoplay=0&wmode=opaque&loop=0&controls=1&autohide=0&showinfo=0&theme=dark&color=red&enablejsapi=0

longtalldrink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:25pm
And let us not forget Occupy Wallstreet

was the continuation of the Poor People's Campaign. We are all still in dire straights.

Lily O Lady on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 11:09am
I up-voted you but

@longtalldrink @longtalldrink
that's " dire ." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

was the continuation of the Poor People's Campaign. We are all still in dire straights.

thanatokephaloides on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 1:33pm
dyer

@Lily O Lady

I up-voted you but that's "dire." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

A "dyer" is one who applies dyes.

"Dire" is a synonym for desperate. And it applies to our situation.

#6 #6
that's " dire ." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

longtalldrink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:21pm
Ugh

@Lily O Lady I saw that after I posted it and knew the grammar police would get me...yikes.

#6 #6
that's " dire ." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

lizzyh7 on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 5:40pm
I just assumed it was

@longtalldrink a play on Dyer Straights...!

#6.1 I saw that after I posted it and knew the grammar police would get me...yikes.

longtalldrink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 8:36pm
Actually

@lizzyh7 they were one of my favorite groups...so maybe subconsciously, this is what I was doing?

#6.1.2 a play on Dyer Straights...!

dkmich on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:37pm
So pay more taxes if you make more than 250K, BUT

pay $125K per kid for college if you earn more than 125K. That makes zero sense. A parent has no legal obligation to a child after age 18, but the 18 year old must include parental income if they apply for PELL. If they are included in their parents family, then the family must be legally obligated to pay for college. 18 can legally die, go to war, be incarcerated, and contractually bound, but they can't have a drink or be legally entitled to the same rights and benefits as everyone else.

Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you pay for yours." It is no wonder there is so much resentment at all levels and an economic coalition can't be formed. Somebody is always measuring who mom loves best. At no time did Bernie say a word about means testing a GD thing. It is why he was able to transcend labels.

thanatokephaloides on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 1:42pm
paid for

@dkmich

Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you pay for yours."

Especially when one considers the chances of that being true are really quite small.

Contrary to the Randian beLIEf, they didn't build what they have all by themselves. Society carried quite a bit of the freight here.

pay $125K per kid for college if you earn more than 125K. That makes zero sense. A parent has no legal obligation to a child after age 18, but the 18 year old must include parental income if they apply for PELL. If they are included in their parents family, then the family must be legally obligated to pay for college. 18 can legally die, go to war, be incarcerated, and contractually bound, but they can't have a drink or be legally entitled to the same rights and benefits as everyone else.

Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you pay for yours." It is no wonder there is so much resentment at all levels and an economic coalition can't be formed. Somebody is always measuring who mom loves best. At no time did Bernie say a word about means testing a GD thing. It is why he was able to transcend labels.

Snode on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:01pm
Thomas Edsall has an article

That starts out on disparities in housing, but rounds abouts to the "Elite Class" and the urban gentrification by corporatist democrats. It points out how the democratic party caters to this elite wing, and how the NIMBY-ism of the elites blocks affordable housing laws. It ends up with some observations:

"Taking it a step further, a Democratic Party based on urban cosmopolitan business liberalism runs the risk not only of leading to the continued marginalization of the minority poor, but also -- as the policies of the Trump administration demonstrate -- to the continued neglect of the white working-class electorate that put Trump in the White House."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/19/opinion/democrats-gentrification-citi...

Lenzabi on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:48pm
We Can't

We really can't afford the wealthy parasite class anymore nor should we suffer their think tanks that make folks worship them and their lifestyles of indulgence and greed!

[Apr 24, 2018] Class and how they use words to hide reality

Notable quotes:
"... -- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW) ..."
"... @thanatokephaloides ..."
"... -- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW) ..."
"... @longtalldrink ..."
"... @longtalldrink ..."
"... @Lily O Lady ..."
"... @Lily O Lady ..."
"... @longtalldrink ..."
"... @lizzyh7 ..."
"... @dkmich ..."
Apr 24, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

gjohnsit on Wed, 04/18/2018 - 11:45pm

I've come to realize that there's a lot of confusion out there due to people using words with very specific definitions.

For example, when a Republican talks about "freedom" they don't mean "freedom from want".
They mean "freedom from government oppression", but only government oppression.
Private oppression? Republicans will either deny it exists, or justify it.
When a Republican is "pro-life" it only refers to birth.
Because those very same pro-life people are generally pro-war and pro-death penalty.

Democrats act the same way about different things.
When a Democrat says "diversity", they only mean diversity of race, gender, or sexual orientation.
Diversity of ideas? Diversity of class? Not so much.
When a Democrat says "privilege" it refers to "white" and "male".
Privilege of wealth? (i.e. like the dictionary definition) That generally gets forgotten.

And then there is the bipartisan misuse of words, which revolves around war and wealth.
When they say "humanitarian war" they mean, um, some contradictory concepts that are meaningless, but are designed to make you feel a certain way.
When they say "socialism" they really mean "state oppression" regardless of the economic system.
As for the many version of socialism with minimal or non-existent central governments? Or when socialist programs work? No one talks about them.

Let's not forget substituting or mixing up "middle class" for "working class".
"Working class" now equals "poor", which isn't right.
They use "working class" as a smear too.
When you say "working class" some people automatically insert certain words in front of it, as if it's generally understood.

When many hear discussion of outreach to "working class" voters, they silently add the words "white" and "male" and all too often imagine them working on a factory floor or in construction. They shouldn't. According to another analysis by CAP from late last year, just under 6 in 10 members of the working class are white, and the group is almost half female (46 percent).

The topic of the needs and interests of the working class is usually race and gender neutral. Only the dishonest or indoctrinated can't wrap their minds around that fact.This is important because working class values don't require a race or gender lens.

a new report released today by the Center for American Progress makes a convincing argument, using extensive polling data, that this divide does not need to exist. As it turns out, in many cases, voters -- both college educated and working class, and of all races -- are in favor of an economic agenda that would offer them broader protections whether it comes to work, sickness or retirement.
"The polling shows that workers across race support similar views on economic policy issues," said David Madland, the co-author of the report, entitled "The Working-Class Push for Progressive Economic Policies." "They support a higher minimum wage, higher taxes on the wealthy, and more spending on healthcare and retirement. There is broad support among workers for progressive economic policy."

This shows that it's possible to make economic issues front and center in a campaign platform in a way that doesn't just talk to working class whites and dismisses the concerns of female and minority voters. It also shows that the oft-discussed dilemma among Democrats -- whether to prioritize college educated voters or working class ones -- may be a false choice.

Propaganda is all about false choices. To accomplish this, the media has created a world in which the working class exist only in the margins .

With the working class largely unrepresented in the media, or represented only in supporting roles, is it any wonder that people begin to identify in ways other than their class? Which is exactly what the ruling class wants .

I can't believe I used to fall for this nonsense! It takes a stupendous level of cognitive dissonance to simultaneously celebrate the fortunes of someone from a specific identity while looking past the vast sea of people from said identity who are stuck in gut-wrenching poverty. We pop champagnes for the neo-gentry while disregarding our own tribulations. It's the most stunning form of logical jujitsu establishment shills have successfully conditioned us to accept; instead of gauging the health of the economy and the vitality of our nation based on the collective whole, we have been hoodwinked to accept the elevation of a few as success for us all.
Diversity has become a scam and nothing more than a corporate bamboozle and a federated scheme that is used to hide the true nature of crony capitalism. We have become a Potemkin society where tokens are put on the stage to represent equality while the vast majority of Americans are enslaved by diminishing wages or kneecapped into dependency. The whole of our politics has been turned into an identity-driven hustle. On both sides of the aisle and at every corner of the social divide are grievance whisperers and demagogues who keep spewing fuel on the fire of tribalism. They use our pains and suffering to make millions only to turn their backs on us the minute they attain riches and status.

It's only when you see an article written by the ruling elite, or one that identifies with the ruling elite, that you realize just how out-of-touch they can be. The rich really are different - they are sociopaths. They've totally and completely bought into their own righteousness, merit and virtue .

Class ascendance led me to become what Susan Jacoby classifies in her recent New York Times Op-Ed "Stop Apologizing for Being Elite" as an "elite": a vague description of a group of people who have received advanced degrees. Jacoby urges elites to reject the shame that they have supposedly recently developed, a shame that somehow stems from failing to stop the working class from embracing Trumpism. Jacoby laments that, following the 2016 election, these elites no longer take pride in their wealth, their education, their social status, and posits that if only elites embraced their upward mobility, the working class would have something to aspire to and thus discard their fondness for Trump and his promises to save them.

That level of condescension just blows my mind. It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil, or Russia, than I do with the wealthy elite in my own country. Don't think that the wealthy haven't figured that out too.

Pricknick on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:03am
Condescension.

That is the only word you need pay attention to.
I am inferior therefore expendable.
How the lofty will fail. They will succumb to those who are lessor in their minds.
Nice post gjohn.

Wink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 4:11pm
And posted as a pod,

sort of, at... Patreon.com/C99
@Pricknick

That is the only word you need pay attention to.
I am inferior therefore expendable.
How the lofty will fail. They will succumb to those who are lessor in their minds.
Nice post gjohn.

thanatokephaloides on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:13am
the working class and the employing class have nothing in common

It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil, or Russia, than a do with the wealthy elite in my own country.
Don't think that the wealthy haven't figured that out too.

The working class and the employing class have nothing in common.
There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among
millions of the working people and the few, who make up the employing
class, have all the good things of life.

-- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW)
source

QMS on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 8:17pm
over generalized

@thanatokephaloides I have been a worker and an employer for most of my career. I associate with many of the same ilk. None of us working / employer types can afford to hire the millions of under employed. Maybe a few here and there. We are not wealthy, nor are we taking advantage of the poor. Try to put this lofty idealism into perspective.

It occurred to me some time ago that I have much more in common with a working class slob in France, or Mexico, or Brazil, or Russia, than a do with the wealthy elite in my own country.
Don't think that the wealthy haven't figured that out too.

The working class and the employing class have nothing in common.
There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among
millions of the working people and the few, who make up the employing
class, have all the good things of life.

-- Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers Of The World (IWW)
source

earthling1 on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:18am
Their heads will look real fine

on a pike.

Meteor Man on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:30am
The Working-Class Push for Progressive Economic Policies

Somebody at CAP may be out of a job. I tried to find the report and came up empty. Can you provide the link? Thx.

The Aspie Corner on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 7:56am
But 'Murica is a classless society..../s

My ass. Class was a huge factor in 2016 (And still is) and working class issues were utterly ignored.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/-jjrSWCgJus?modestbranding=0&html5=1&rel=0&autoplay=0&wmode=opaque&loop=0&controls=1&autohide=0&showinfo=0&theme=dark&color=red&enablejsapi=0

longtalldrink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:25pm
And let us not forget Occupy Wallstreet

was the continuation of the Poor People's Campaign. We are all still in dire straights.

Lily O Lady on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 11:09am
I up-voted you but

@longtalldrink @longtalldrink
that's " dire ." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

was the continuation of the Poor People's Campaign. We are all still in dire straights.

thanatokephaloides on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 1:33pm
dyer

@Lily O Lady

I up-voted you but that's "dire." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

A "dyer" is one who applies dyes.

"Dire" is a synonym for desperate. And it applies to our situation.

#6 #6
that's " dire ." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

longtalldrink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:21pm
Ugh

@Lily O Lady I saw that after I posted it and knew the grammar police would get me...yikes.

#6 #6
that's " dire ." Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

lizzyh7 on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 5:40pm
I just assumed it was

@longtalldrink a play on Dyer Straights...!

#6.1 I saw that after I posted it and knew the grammar police would get me...yikes.

longtalldrink on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 8:36pm
Actually

@lizzyh7 they were one of my favorite groups...so maybe subconsciously, this is what I was doing?

#6.1.2 a play on Dyer Straights...!

dkmich on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 12:37pm
So pay more taxes if you make more than 250K, BUT

pay $125K per kid for college if you earn more than 125K. That makes zero sense. A parent has no legal obligation to a child after age 18, but the 18 year old must include parental income if they apply for PELL. If they are included in their parents family, then the family must be legally obligated to pay for college. 18 can legally die, go to war, be incarcerated, and contractually bound, but they can't have a drink or be legally entitled to the same rights and benefits as everyone else.

Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you pay for yours." It is no wonder there is so much resentment at all levels and an economic coalition can't be formed. Somebody is always measuring who mom loves best. At no time did Bernie say a word about means testing a GD thing. It is why he was able to transcend labels.

thanatokephaloides on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 1:42pm
paid for

@dkmich

Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you pay for yours."

Especially when one considers the chances of that being true are really quite small.

Contrary to the Randian beLIEf, they didn't build what they have all by themselves. Society carried quite a bit of the freight here.

pay $125K per kid for college if you earn more than 125K. That makes zero sense. A parent has no legal obligation to a child after age 18, but the 18 year old must include parental income if they apply for PELL. If they are included in their parents family, then the family must be legally obligated to pay for college. 18 can legally die, go to war, be incarcerated, and contractually bound, but they can't have a drink or be legally entitled to the same rights and benefits as everyone else.

Since the college-educated express less support at any price, it reeks of pettiness and tit for tat. "I paid for mine, you pay for yours." It is no wonder there is so much resentment at all levels and an economic coalition can't be formed. Somebody is always measuring who mom loves best. At no time did Bernie say a word about means testing a GD thing. It is why he was able to transcend labels.

Snode on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:01pm
Thomas Edsall has an article

That starts out on disparities in housing, but rounds abouts to the "Elite Class" and the urban gentrification by corporatist democrats. It points out how the democratic party caters to this elite wing, and how the NIMBY-ism of the elites blocks affordable housing laws. It ends up with some observations:

"Taking it a step further, a Democratic Party based on urban cosmopolitan business liberalism runs the risk not only of leading to the continued marginalization of the minority poor, but also -- as the policies of the Trump administration demonstrate -- to the continued neglect of the white working-class electorate that put Trump in the White House."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/19/opinion/democrats-gentrification-citi...

Lenzabi on Thu, 04/19/2018 - 2:48pm
We Can't

We really can't afford the wealthy parasite class anymore nor should we suffer their think tanks that make folks worship them and their lifestyles of indulgence and greed!

[Apr 24, 2018] Constant and persistent nudging generally results in an angry backlash. Somewhere around when a person realizes "This is not where I wanted to be." That's now very true for neoclassic economy courses. Many students understand the game and hate it

Notable quotes:
"... cognitive infiltration ..."
Apr 24, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Yves Smith, April 21, 2018 at 12:26 pm

Nudge was the title of a book by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein on how to manipulate people in their supposed best interest, like in cafeteria lines, to put whole fruit before desserts made with sugar.

See here for more detail:

blennylips , April 21, 2018 at 1:49 pm

If you liked Nudge , you'll love " cognitive infiltration ":

Conspiracy Theories
Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 08-03

Because those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology, in accordance with which it is rational to hold such theories, the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups. Various policy dilemmas, such as the question whether it is better for government to rebut conspiracy theories or to ignore them, are explored in this light.
Keywords: conspiracy theories, social networks, informational cascades, group polarization
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585

Is not this what discerning MIC's all do these days, via FBI FB?

Synoia , April 21, 2018 at 11:25 am

A nudge too far?

Constant and persistent nudging generally results in an angry backlash. Somewhere around when a person realizes "This is not where I wanted to be."

JTMcPhee , April 21, 2018 at 12:40 pm

And of course we mopes have been "nudged" into pretty much that blind serfdom alluded to. Back in the Cave, with not much chance of dispelling the belief in and subjection to the shadows projected on the wall we are forced to face

oaf , April 21, 2018 at 1:52 pm

manipulation is the sowing of a Karmic garden

Tom_Doak , April 21, 2018 at 6:09 pm

The classic nudge example is opting you into a 401(k) unless you opt out.

That's supposedly better for you but it is DEFINITELY better for the brokerage handling your account.

none , April 21, 2018 at 10:01 pm

I had to look it up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudge_theory

I hadn't heard of it before.

Tyronius , April 22, 2018 at 12:21 am

I rather detest the notion of someone or entity 'nudging' me in the direction of some behavior, especially in a paternalistic mode where the assumption is that they know better than I what I 'should' be doing or thinking.

On one level, isn't that a working definition of advertising? On another, it smacks of authoritarianism. Don't we have enough of this kind of thing already? Worse, what's the first reaction one naturally has when they realize they're being manipulated? Seems to be a strategy fraught with risk of getting exactly the wrong response.

If I'm to be encouraged to behave in a given way, show me the respect of offering a conscious, intelligent argument to do so on the merits, or kindly go (family blog) yourself!

Anti-Schmoo , April 23, 2018 at 4:18 am

In economics, the single most important thing to understand is debt.
If you understand debt; you won't have any debt.
Debt and freedom are the antithisis of each other.
Without debt; nudges have no influence.

Anti-Schmoo , April 23, 2018 at 4:24 am

A follow up:
https://www.esquire.com/lifestyle/money/a19181300/nassim-nicholas-taleb-money-advice/
A very frank discussion of debt and freedom.

[Apr 23, 2018] The Tony Blair Rule: The Truth Takes 15 Years to Come Out, Skripal Countdown Starts Now - Simonyan

Highly recommended!
Yes 15 years s about right for false flag operations.
Apr 23, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

I just posted a link to a Vesti clip at the end of the previous thread, because it seems so relevant to b's message about the western crackdown on free speech in this information war. This open thread is coming so close on the heels of that wonderful article, that I want to double-post here as well as there.

Margarita Simonyan of RT says how she's trying to talk, not to power but to common people, because there are those among the common people who do speak up and who really do shape public opinion - not governments. She cited Roger Waters as an example, who was speaking at a concert and telling the truth about the White Helmets.

She said, someone has to read in order to speak. And someone has to write so someone can read:


The Tony Blair Rule: The Truth Takes 15 Years to Come Out, Skripal Countdown Starts Now - Simonyan

Posted by: Grieved | Apr 22, 2018 9:53:58 PM | 54

[Apr 22, 2018] The American ruling class loves Identity Politics, because Identity Politics divides the people into hostile groups and prevents any resistance to the ruling elite

Highly recommended!
The quotes are from A Conversation on Race, by Paul Craig Roberts - The Unz Review
Notable quotes:
"... The American ruling class loves Identity Politics, because Identity Politics divides the people into hostile groups and prevents any resistance to the ruling elite. With blacks screaming at whites, women screaming at men, and homosexuals screaming at heterosexuals, there is no one left to scream at the rulers. ..."
"... Consequently, the ruling elite have funded "black history," "women's studies," and "transgender dialogues," in universities as a way to institutionalize the divisiveness that protects them. These "studies" have replaced real history with fake history. ..."
Apr 22, 2018 | www.unz.com

Steve Gittelson , April 19, 2018 at 2:43 am GMT

PCR's latest is really good. I love it when he gets to ripping, and doesn't stop for 2000+ words or so. It reads a lot better than Toynbee, fersher.

The working class, designated by Hillary Clinton as "the Trump deplorables," is now the victimizer, not the victim. Marxism has been stood on its head.

The American ruling class loves Identity Politics, because Identity Politics divides the people into hostile groups and prevents any resistance to the ruling elite. With blacks screaming at whites, women screaming at men, and homosexuals screaming at heterosexuals, there is no one left to scream at the rulers.

The ruling elite favors a "conversation on race," because the ruling elite know it can only result in accusations that will further divide society. Consequently, the ruling elite have funded "black history," "women's studies," and "transgender dialogues," in universities as a way to institutionalize the divisiveness that protects them. These "studies" have replaced real history with fake history.

Steve Gittelson , April 19, 2018 at 3:59 pm GMT

Just a bit more real truth from PCR. Carry on

All of America, indeed of the entire West, lives in The Matrix, a concocted [and false] reality. Western peoples are so propagandized, so brainwashed, that they have no understanding that their disunity was created in order to make them impotent in the face of a rapacious ruling class, a class whose arrogance and hubris has the world on the brink of nuclear Armageddon.

History as it actually happened is disappearing as those who tell the truth are dismissed as misogynists, racists, homophobes, Putin agents, terrorist sympathizers, anti-Semites, and conspiracy theorists. Liberals who complained mightily of McCarthyism now practice it ten-fold.

The United States with its brainwashed and incompetent population -- indeed, the entirety of the Western populations are incompetent -- and with its absence of intelligent leadership has no chance against Russia and China, two massive countries arising from their overthrow of police states as the West descends into a gestapo state. The West is over and done with. Nothing remains of the West but the lies used to control the people. All hope is elsewhere.

[Apr 20, 2018] How neoliberal MSM twist facts

Apr 20, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

Ruby4 , 13 Apr 2018 14:15

Labour calls for the attack on Douma to be "fully investigated". That sounds unarguable. But then what? Jeremy Corbyn issued the same call after the chemical attack that killed at least 74 at Khan Sheikhoun a year ago: demanding there be a "UN investigation and those responsible be held to account". The UN duly investigated and in October concluded unambiguously that the Assad regime had used sarin gas. But Corbyn greeted that verdict with silence.

The report that Mr Freedland provides a link to, actually says:

"5. While the OPCW Fact-Finding Mission in the Syrian Arab Republic works to establish the facts surrounding allegations of the use of toxic chemicals for hostile purposes in the country, it is not mandated to reach conclusions about attributing responsibility for chemical weapons use. 1 Following a determination by the FactFinding Mission that a specific incident in the Syrian Arab Republic involved or likely involved the use of chemicals as weapons, the Mechanism conducts an investigation to identify, to the greatest extent feasible, the perpetrators, organizers, sponsors or those otherwise involved. In conducting its investigation, the Mechanism relies on findings of the Fact-Finding Mission regarding the use of chemicals as weapons in each incident and pursues a rigorous independent examination of the available information surrounding such use so as to identify, to the greatest extent feasible, those responsible."

It doesn't appear to be claiming to be concluding "unambiguously that the Assad regime had used sarin gas." Am I missing something here?

Mr Freedland's allegation that "Corbyn greeted that verdict with silence" is highly suspect:

"RT:Today, Moscow says it has evidence that rebels have used sarin gas. Earlier Britain said that Assad forces were behind the chemical attack. But why didn't Britain and the US come forward with the same sort of hard evidence that Russia has come forward with?

JC: That's an interesting question. I can't speak for the British or the US governments, but they made these allegations about the use of chemical weapons – and there are apparently stocks of chemical weapons being held in Syria, which may well have fallen into opposition hands, or may still be in government hands, or maybe both – but the assertion was made that they had been used. But no hard evidence came up, and indeed, there was a great deal of skepticism surrounding the evidence that was never presented. And the Russian evidence today appears much stronger, and they said they were going to put that evidence in the hands of the United Nations - that has got to be a good thing. However, proving or not proving this doesn't end the crisis, there has to be the rapid resumption of talks by Geneva too, all parties must be involved – including Iran. If we're to bring about a settlement, there's got to be involvement of Iran, as well as all the different parties in Syria."

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/syria-chemical-weapons-evidence-926 /

[Apr 18, 2018] The Rape of Russia, an Interview with F. William Engdahl (Audio)

Notable quotes:
"... What the US Government under George Herbert Walker Bush, Bush Senior organised together with CIA, old boy networks of his, in terms of the breaking up of the Soviet Union and the looting of the assets, this open theft, the destruction of pensions, security, the health system and everything. The only appropriate word is the rape of Russia. They just pondered anything that they could. ..."
"... And the West, the Bush networks recruited a handful of KGB agents around Yeltsin who literally promoted Yeltsin to the top when they engineered the August 1991 fake coup. ..."
"... And through that the – this network, this corrupt network within the KGB that was working with the CIA, working with General Philip, Bob [unclear] is one of them, so called at that time the KGB brain. He was head of the KGB Fifth Directorate controlling to roll this in. ..."
"... They engineered a complete opening up of the assets of the Russian Federation which called today the Russian Federation, the largest part of the former Soviet Union and they made it such that the Russian Federation would assume all of the debts of Ukraine, of Kazakhstan and the other socialist republics of the Soviet and all the assets, all the crucial assets that were within the Russian Federation so the aluminium Rusal that's in the headlines yesterday, the nickel, the oil, the gas, just hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars' worth of assets that came into Yeltsin's control. ..."
"... Soros was very intermittently tied with Jeffrey Sachs and the whole Harvard to become a shock therapy group and working with Lawrence Summers team at the US Treasury under Clinton. ..."
"... So, Chubais was as an adviser to Yeltsin at that time and the key person on the economy arranged the secret meeting with George Soros. And Soros agreed to finance of course on behalf of Yeltsin, the referendum campaign. So he funnelled money over a million dollars by some accounts to offshore accounts set up to be used by Chubais to buy media. ..."
"... In 1989 President George H. W. Bush began the multi-billion dollar Project Hammer program using an investment strategy to bring about the economic destruction of the Soviet Union including the theft of the Soviet treasury, the destabilization of the ruble, funding a KGB coup against Gorbachev in August 1991 and the seizure of major energy and munitions industries in the Soviet Union. ..."
"... Given the depth of the fall, the rise (under Putin) has been remarkable. ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | russia-insider.com

The Rape of Russia (full transcript)

Lars Schall: Hello ladies and gentlemen. I am now connected with F. William Engdahl, who has written a new book, Manifest Destiny: Democracy as Cognitive Dissonance. Hi William.

F. William Engdahl: Hello, Lars. Good to be with you again.

LS: Great to have you with us. And first off, let me read something to you and our audience that was written by the economist Dean Baker earlier this month.

As a long-term columnist at the NYT, Thomas Friedman apparently never feels the need to know anything about the topics on which he writes. This explains his sarcastic speculation that Putin could be a CIA agent since he has done so much to hurt Russia.

For all his authoritarian tendencies, it is likely that most Russians think primarily about Putin's impact on the economy, just as is typically the case among voters in the United States. On that front, Putin has a very good record.

According to data from the IMF Russia's economy had plunged in the 1990s under the Yeltsin presidency. When Putin took over in 1998, per capita income in the country had shrunk by more than 40 percent from its 1990 level. This is a far sharper downturn than the United States saw in the Great Depression. Since Putin took power its per capita income has risen by more than 115 percent, an average annual growth rate of more than 3.9 percent.

While this growth has been very unequal, that was also the case even as Russia's economy was collapsing under Yeltsin. The typical Russian has done hugely better in the last two decades under Putin than they did in the period when Yeltsin was in power.

For this reason, there are probably few Russians who would have sympathy for Friedman's speculation about Putin's ties to the CIA. The same would not be the case for Boris Yeltsin.

Now, I think this is a good starting point for our discussion William because in your book, you have a chapter entitled The Rape of Russia, the CIA's Yeltsin Coup d'état. Why do you talk about rape related to Russia?

FWE: What the US Government under George Herbert Walker Bush, Bush Senior organised together with CIA, old boy networks of his, in terms of the breaking up of the Soviet Union and the looting of the assets, this open theft, the destruction of pensions, security, the health system and everything. The only appropriate word is the rape of Russia. They just pondered anything that they could.

And what you just read from Mr. Friedman is of course horse rubbish but the real CIA asset of this whole collapse of the Soviet Union in the late 1980s was in fact Boris Yeltsin and the so called Yeltsin Family, the Yeltsin Mafia. And in my book, the Manifest Destiny book I document and detail at great lengths the relation of a handful of KGB very, very senior persons who worked with the Bush Senior old boys CIA networks in the West and their banks to create a group of oligarchs around Yeltsin, you know the famous Russian oligarchs, well, The New York Times and other Western Media portrayed them as Russian Mafia. They were kind of mafia but the real point was that they were a CIA-run mafia. They were run by the West. They betrayed their own country, their own people and literally stole billions and billions and billions of dollars of assets. And that's the reason for the title in that chapter.

LS: And Boris Yeltsin was very essential for this.

FWE: He was the key figure. He had been selected as a regional governor and brought into Moscow and a certain point Gorbachev saw him as a rising star and someone that could help with a little bit more liberal image as [unclear] was – the Russian economy was running into serious trouble in the '80s, the Star Wars of Reagan, the Nicaragua and above all the war in Afghanistan which is a CIA project with the Mujahideen, that took 10 years long that was bleeding the Soviet economy, the Soviet Union's Vietnam, as Brzezinski used to call it.

And the West, the Bush networks recruited a handful of KGB agents around Yeltsin who literally promoted Yeltsin to the top when they engineered the August 1991 fake coup. You remember, I'm sure many people remember the picture of Boris Yeltsin standing there courageously on top of a Soviet tank in front of the Russian White House or Soviet House, the Supreme Soviet building and reading a speech defying Gorbachev and so forth. Well, that was a KGB CIA-engineered coup d'état in June 1991. And through that the – this network, this corrupt network within the KGB that was working with the CIA, working with General Philip, Bob [unclear] is one of them, so called at that time the KGB brain. He was head of the KGB Fifth Directorate controlling to roll this in. And he later joined the [#inaudible 00:06:40-0#] oil and to this day he's still a member of the State Duma giving him prosecution immunity.

So, some of these people are still around after some 23, 25 years and incredibly enough but others of them have died off, have been killed, or murdered or whatever. But the operation that was done with Yeltsin, this corrupt KGB network working with the CIA financed Yeltsin's the silent seat of the presidency of the Russian Federation. And once they had their man in controlling the Russian Federation which is the largest of the former Soviet Union, the Socialist Republic, they were able to engineer through the international monetary fund that was mandated to oversee the transformation of the Soviet economy.

They engineered a complete opening up of the assets of the Russian Federation which called today the Russian Federation, the largest part of the former Soviet Union and they made it such that the Russian Federation would assume all of the debts of Ukraine, of Kazakhstan and the other socialist republics of the Soviet and all the assets, all the crucial assets that were within the Russian Federation so the aluminium Rusal that's in the headlines yesterday, the nickel, the oil, the gas, just hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars' worth of assets that came into Yeltsin's control.

LS: But those assets were sold to a price that was rather ridiculous.

FWE: Someone estimated that that gets into the whole coupon privatisation that was set up under Yeltsin in the '90s. The coupon privatisation issued one coupon to every single Russian man, woman and child 140 million in total. And the value of those coupons was such someone estimated that the totality of Russian Soviet's Fed assets or Russian Federation assets now was equal to the value of the stock at that point of General Electric Company on the New York Stock Exchange. I mean that's just laughable. Russia had financial bankruptcy because the shock therapy, the Jeffrey Sachs and others from Harvard and elsewhere brought in, George Soros and his pals. That created bankrupt companies that couldn't stand on their own and suddenly they had no, no resources. But the assets, the assets on the ground, the nickel, the aluminium, the uranium that Hillary Clinton knows more than a little bit about them, all of these were estimated to be in the trillions of dollars. And this is what the Bush operation aimed at. And they used NGOs, they used the National Endowment for Democracy, they used, George Soros' Open Society Foundation and so forth to bring this about.

LS: You've mentioned already the coup d'etat attempt of August 1991. Highly important for things to come was something that took place in early 1991 and that was the theft of the Soviet gold. Please tell us about this.

FWE: The, under the Soviet Union, this is a very crucial point about the transition that Washington forced on the Russian Federation because Yeltsin was, I think as long as he was well-supplied with vodka he didn't protest very much. But under the Soviet system and the Russian Federation took this over, there was a state bank, not a private central bank like the Federal Reserve or the European Central Bank today but a state bank that was an entity of the Russian State apparatus and that was called the Gosbank. And a man named Viktor Gerashchenko was the chairman of Gosbank at the time of Yeltsin's early start in 1991.

And Gerashchenko made a speech around that time in November of '91 to the Russian Duma or the parliament such as it was and said, "I have to report to you ladies and gentlemen that of perhaps 3,000 tons of Gosbank state-owned gold reserves, we have an estimated less than 400 tons that we can account for." And then he had to go to tell, shock members of parliament that he had no idea what happened to the missing gold, which of course was a lie. And Gerashchenko had created right after 1989 to prepare this coup d'etat coup, which was the CIA and Bush's old boys, he had created something called [unclear] on the Channel Islands in the Island of Jersey to handle the Russian foreign currency reserves.

And the Jersey was exempt from European supervision, so this was a perfect place to hide money, dirty money or stolen money and they managed something like $37 billion between 1993 and 1998. The Gerashchenko and the Gosbank even went to the lengths of hiring a New York Financial Detective firm called the Financial CIA back then called Jules Kroll Associate. And they were told to track the Soviet gold, find out what happened to it and something like $14 billion of communist party assets that were missing as well. And the Cruel which was tied with the CIA linked AIG Insurance Group Hank Greenberg whom you remember from the 2008 to the bail out of Henry Paulson.

LS: Yes.

FEW: The Kroll Associates after a few months announced that they had no results in the attempt to find the missing Soviet Gosbank gold. Then to add insult to injury, the IMF came in and rewrote the constitution of the Russian Federation under Yeltsin and took the power of money creation just like the Federal Reserve took the power of money creation from the congress in 1913. They took the power of money creation from the state and created the Russian Federation Central Bank, the Russian Central Bank and gave it a mandate for two things. One, to control inflation and the other to create currency stability.

Now, in Russia that day that meant stability of the ruble against the US dollar. So it effectively hammer-locked the Russian money creation into the US dollar. And unfortunately that constitution amendment holds until the present day. It's one of the difficulties that Vladimir Putin has been having to try to persuade the Independent Central Bank to lower interest rates more rapidly as inflation is simply managed as a problem in Russia in the last two years.

So, they looted the gold so that there would be no stability to the ruble. If you don't have any gold-backing, then western investors are going to lack confidence which is sort of what happened. And then they began working with very select western bankers to get their money out of Russia.

LS: And instrumental to get money out of Russia were Valmet and Riggs. Can you tell us please about some crucial personnel that was employed there at Valmet and Riggs?

FWE: Valmet Riggs was kind of a fusion of a Swiss bank and Riggs Bank of Washington D. C. And Riggs Bank, this is really quite a fascinating and very little discussed aspect of the reign of Russia back in the '90s.

So you have something called Riggs Bank in Washington and they were set up decades earlier since the 1960s CIA Bay of Pigs operation, they were known as the CIA tied bank. They invested the assets of people like Marcos of the Philippines until when he was close to the CIA. And there was a former NATO Ambassador named Alton Keel and in 1989 when the Soviet KGB generals and they had a group of protégés called the 'Kids' by George Bush Senior. The protégés were in their 30s and a couple of them were in their 40s but rather young. And they were the ones who were nominated to become the oligarchs, the frontal men for taking these state assets the aluminium, the oil assets and other things and looting the Russian Federation.

And Alton Keel just as the Russians were setting up men at a bank for the oligarchs to funnel their stolen assets, de facto stolen assets, Keel went from NATO and the National Security Council to become a head of international banking of Riggs Bank in Washington and its deputy chairman.

Now, it gets even more interesting because the international banking group of Riggs included a new entity that had been created called Riggs Valmet SA in Switzerland, and Riggs Valmet was set up by a man named Jonathan J. Bush, a private banker, who just happened to be the brother of George Herbert Walker Bush. So, Bush brother and Alton Keel set up Riggs Valmet, there was a money laundering apparatus in Geneva and Riggs then through their help bought the major share in Geneva Valmet to create Riggs Valmet.

So, you have the brother of the president of the United States up to his eyeballs in this whole Yeltsin CIA money laundering operation. And then Jonathan Bush was created CEO of something called Riggs Investment in Connecticut where he lived and at that point the looting and taking of the dollar assets out of Russia was just unstoppable. It was in the billions and tens of billions of dollars.

LS: William, there is one guy who was working closely with those people and he was working on Wall Street but later on he was personally recruited by George Tenet then the Director of CIA to become the number three at the CIA, and this is Alvin Bernard "Buzzy" Krongard.

FWE: Yes. We meet "Buzzy" Krongard at Bankers Trust, which bought up Alex Brown, and Krongard became vice chairman of Bankers Trust along with another charming character named Carter Beese. And at the time of the 1998 collapse of the ruble, Krongard was formally made, as you've pointed out, number three, the executive director at the CIA under George Tenet. So, it's a CIA network from beginning to end, from the banking side to you know the direct CIA side. You have Carter Beast, you have "Buzzy" Krongard, Jonathan Bush and Alton Keel and they were the ones working with Valmet as the Riggs Valmet Bank in Geneva to pull this money out through shell companies.

And the oligarchs, this is an interesting part of this whole thing that you know right now Theresa May and the foreign secretary Boris Johnson in the UK are accusing Putin of murdering almost everybody since the birth of Jesus Christ. And one of them was the person who had been the trusted bodyguard of one of the oligarchs living in London Boris Berezovsky.

And Berezovsky was one of the dirtiest of these oligarchs. He'd financed the Ukrainian Colour Revolution back in 2003, 2004 as a revenge against Putin because he at first thought Putin could be bought like Yeltsin and suddenly he realized that he was up against the faction of nationalists within of what had been the KGB but wanted to stabilise and preserve Russia as a functioning nation today. And so Mikhail Khodorkovskyi, Roman Abramovich, who is listed on the sanctions list yesterday, and Berezovsky were some of the leading oligarchs that were created by this Bush operation.

LS: And to jumpstart all of this, we have to talk about something that is well, that is stranger than fiction and that is something called for example "Yamashita's Gold". If our audience is interested in this, they could for example look for an article written by Chalmers Johnson, the famous Asian expert, The Looting of Asia, which was published at the London Review of Books on the 20 th of November of 2003 because then they can find something on this topic of Yamashita's gold on an instant basis in the internet ( https://www.lrb.co.uk/v25/n22/chalmers-johnson/the-looting-of-asia ). I think this is just fair

FWE: Yeah.

LS: because no one really is aware of this whole story. Please tell us about this.

FWE: The Yamashita Gold story is one of the, as you've said really incredible stories of post-World War II. During the Second World War, the Japanese Imperial Family looted the gold of occupied Arch of China, they looted the gold of all the parts of Asia that they had conquered.

LS: Basically from 1895 to 1945.

FWE: Yeah, yeah. And because they had no guarantee that Japan was going to win the war, the emperor ordered the gold to be hidden away in, mostly in the Philippines as far as we know and literally untold tons of gold were buried so deep underground in tunnels around the Philippines and the people who dug the tunnels in many cases were later shot you know so that they couldn't tell. But Marcos who was a CIA asset initially, the dictator of the Philippines through much of the '70s and into the '80s, yeah through the '70, Ferdinand Marcos somehow came upon some of this gold. So, the Japanese looted war body was buried in the early '40s before the end of the war on orders of Emperor Hirohito should they lose the war.

And at some point in the 1970s, Marcos discovered some of the sites where Hirohito's soldiers had buried the gold and the gold was stolen from China, Korea, Philippines, Indonesia and other countries occupied by the Japanese forces. And Marcos, and I think this is the major reason the CIA dumped him, got a little bit greedy and took that gold and started selling it under the market through selective secret Swiss banks. But he used the CIA asset, the Saudi billionaire named Adnan Khashoggi to help them get the gold under the market. And what he didn't realise was that Khashoggi would double cross him. He got a better deal from Bush Senior and the old boys.

LS: We have to say Khashoggi is a figure who is involved for example in B.C.C.I. and in Iran-Contra.

FWE: Back in the '70s he was involved in everything dirty that Bush and the CIA were involved in. B.C.C.I. Bank, the money laundering bank of the CIA, the arms deals, Khashoggi was a huge arms dealer during the Iran and Iraq war the CIA was feeding. He was involved in almost every dirty thing the CIA was doing.

LS: He was aware of this gold.

FWE: Supposedly he was helping Marcos to sell the gold out of the market. So he was not only aware of it, he was right in the middle of it. But then once Marcos was tackled by the CIA Bush got rid of Marcos in 1986. Then someone named Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Armitage and Khashoggi began to work with someone in Canada to create something called – Peter Munk was his name, a rather dubious businessman there – to found something called Barrick Gold of Canada and later it went on to become the world's largest gold mining company.

But Barrick Gold, all available evidence is that buried gold was used to melt down the – I don't want to get too much into the details of this but basically to melt down the Emperor Hirohito's gold that had been discovered by Marcos in the Philippines, to melt it down and use that as collateral for derivatives that would be the collateral used to take over the Russian Federation assets.

LS: The money was basically transformed into bank loans into Russia so that the would-become oligarch people could buy up those assets

FWE: Yes, exactly. So, Yegor Gaidar, the economic privatisation adviser of Yeltsin and his sidekick Anatoly Chubais privatisation had kind of guided this whole process together with Jeffrey Sachs and a group from Harvard University. #00:28:37-8#

LS: Yeah. Let us talk about this. This is known as Harvard Shock Therapy.

FEW: Well, the Jeffrey Sachs Shock Therapy, but the Harvard shock therapy is – well, what happened, the next phase of this incredible story and it's important to keep all this in mind, this is one reason that I wrote the book because of what was clear after the CIA coup d'etat of 2014 in Ukraine and all the sanctions against Putin's Russia and so forth, that if you don't understand what really happened in the '90s, the deep-seated hatred there is on these neoconservatives around Washington and their think tanks as well as, the US political establishment for Putin's Russia and the nationalism behind group Russia. You can't make much sense out of what's going on today with all these incredible lies and accusations against Russia for every crime under the book.

So, what happened is the, as I mentioned the IMF, the International Monetary Fund which had done a beautiful job for Washington in terms of, and George Soros and others in terms of looting the assets of the dead economies of Latin America, Yugoslavia, Poland and others during the oil crisis in the 1970s. The IMF was used and a group of economists around Jeffrey Sachs, a young professor at Harvard University then to impose what Sachs called shock therapy.

And the idea was that Sachs convinced Yeltsin, let prices rise through western market prices and this will increase the supply of goods, you know the stores had a paucity of goods back in the Soviet Times and get rid of trade barriers so foreign commodities could flow in to fill the shelves of Russian stores. The problem was that was a lie. The shops had been full. Okay, you could say it wasn't Kellogg's Corn Flakes and Fried Perdue Chickens or whatever, but they were full of Russian food products until November of '91 when Yeltsin announced that the exact date on December 31 st of 1991, that price controls would be suddenly lifted. So, shop owners immediately hid their goods and waited for December 31 st . So, suddenly the shops were empty and rationing was imposed and so forth. It's just unbelievable.

So, into this, this was Jeffrey Sachs on shock therapy and a group of Harvard University under the auspices of the Harvard Institute for International Development, a group of, among other things later documented CIA agents set up shop in Moscow and worked with Yeltsin's economic team Gaidar and Yegor Gaidar and Anatoly Chubais and themselves got in on the thunder the Russian East Harvard economist working. Now we have a transition in '93 through the Clinton Administration and there former Harvard professor and former World Bank Chief Economist Lawrence Summers became the deputy secretary of treasury responsible for the looting of Russia, effective and responsible for the gold economic transition in the Russian Federation.

And all of the key actors were named by Summers and they were all involved in the privatisation of Russia. They were all from this Harvard Mafia. For example of David Lipton, a former consulting partner of the Jeffrey Sachs, became deputy assistant secretary of treasure for former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and Sachs himself was named Director of Harvard HIID that oversaw the looting of Russia through the voucher privatisation and so forth. And they got grants from the USAID, AID works very closely with the CIA in different parts of the world, this is documented. And so it was really a tight-knit cabal around Lawrence Summers that oversaw this complete theft through these pieces of paper called privatisation coupons.

And what you had was the economic situation under Yeltsin had become so severe I mean people literally they had no jobs because of the freeing up of prices, they could afford to buy little or nothing. So, most people, millions of Russians sold their privatisation vouchers on the street corners to the highest bidder. And of course the would-be oligarchs were the ones with hard currency dollars that they could buy these things up as you pointed out earlier when we talked about them. So, they had credits from their friends in the West, the Riggs Valmet and so forth to buy up these vouchers and therefore they were able when the cost came up, were able to simply steal the property titles, the ownership titles of some of the most valuable investor assets and mineral assets in the world.

LS: And we can talk about this as a classical case of leveraged buyout – even though it was a covered leveraged buyout, if it was?

FEW: Well, you could call it a leveraged buyout. I know Anne Williamson has used that term, the earlier descriptions of it. I think it was simply legalised theft, leveraged buyout gives it too much dignity. That was a term that was quite popular in the financial world back in the '80s and the early '90s. But whatever name you want to give it, it was certainly not a conventional leveraged buyout, it was bizarre in every sense of the word.

LS: An influential figure in this was mentioned by you already, George Soros. And in 1994, as you point out in your book, he was described with the following words from The Guardian in London, "Soros extraordinary role not only as the world's most successful investor but now possibly fantastically as the senior most powerful foreign influence in the whole of the former Soviet Empire, it tricks more suspicion than curiosity." What was he doing back then in Russia?

FWE: Soros was very intermittently tied with Jeffrey Sachs and the whole Harvard to become a shock therapy group and working with Lawrence Summers team at the US Treasury under Clinton. And in 1993 already the opposition inside what was left of Russia when the old communist party was in the Duma and so forth and the population generally was such that the opposition threatened to get out of hand and Yeltsin was forced to agree to hold a national referendum on the entire privatisation. So, this was in April of '93 and the referendum that was given to the population had four questions, yes or no. Do you support Yeltsin? Yes or no? Do you support Yeltsin's economic policy? Yes or no? Do you want early election for president? Yes or no? And do you want early elections for parliament? Yes or no?

So, Chubais was as an adviser to Yeltsin at that time and the key person on the economy arranged the secret meeting with George Soros. And Soros agreed to finance of course on behalf of Yeltsin, the referendum campaign. So he funnelled money over a million dollars by some accounts to offshore accounts set up to be used by Chubais to buy media. And so the media campaign and by this time most of the national media had been bought up by the oligarchs around Yeltsin so they were able to exercise undue influence. So they barely squeak through and got a yes to the privatisation scheme that Harvard, Jeffrey Sachs and George Soros and others had going on. And then of course Soros' company himself benefitted enormously from this privatisation just a little bit later when the auctions took place.

LS: A figure that connects yesterday with today is Vladimir Putin who came to international attention first in 1998, the same year when the ruble crisis took place.

FWE: This was 1999 and in August '98 you had the collapse of the ruble. This was part of the Bush "Operation Hammer's" original design. You had a huge scam going on in the GKO Russian Bond market where the interest rates were just unbelievably high. So, you had all sorts of hot money coming in, making profits and pulling it up including Soros Fund, quantum fund and so forth.

And finally, Yeltsin was getting near the end of his ability to hold this thing together. And he appointed in August '99, he appointed a young former KGB officer who served during the Cold War in East Germany named Vladimir Putin. And briefly Putin had been a deputy mayor in St. Petersburg and briefly had been the head of the successor to the KGB called FSB and the oligarchs around Putin, I've heard various Russian accounts have had this happen but Berezovsky, Brzezinski and other, the Yeltsin oligarchs thought they could take this young guy Putin and do business with him and you know that he was young and had no political base.

So, at that point Putin gave the ultimatum to Yeltsin, resign or face serious consequences and it turned out that Putin which has later been confirmed was the spokesperson for a nationalist faction within the intelligence community, a patriotic faction, call it what you want but Russian nationalist. And so Yeltsin was told, "If you resign and just get out of politics, we'll leave you alone." So he took the offer and ran. And before he did that he named Vladimir Putin as acting president until elections in March the following year.

So, Putin then came into power and called a meeting as it were of the most powerful oligarchs who had made staggering fortunes at the expense of Russia and he called them creators of a corrupt state through insider dealings and began criminal prosecution against oligarchs like Vladimir Gusinsky and Media-Most, a financial group led by Vladimir Potanin who is in the newspaper today and soon left an oil company controlled by a Roman Abramovich and Boris Berezovsky. So, at that point Putin began the uphill battle of trying to stabilise Russia as a functioning economy. And the recent re-election of Putin indicates that the Russian people by and large support that effort of Putin's.

LS: Meanwhile he also had to react to something new that was taking place then and that was NATO was marching east.

FWE: The negotiations and this is, has been confirmed by former US Ambassador to Russia Jack Matlock and that was the negotiations between the Bush administration in 1991 Germany and Gorbachev included a solemn guarantee as Jack Matlock, Ambassador Matlock who was in Moscow in '87 until '91 in this period. He said that we gave a categorical assurance to Gorbachev when the Soviet Union still existed that if United Germany was able to stay in NATO, NATO would not move eastward. So, of course that pledge like so many pledges of Washington under Bush successor governance was honoured in the breach and the newly created National Endowment for Democracy that I write about quite a bit in the Manifest Destiny.

You had, Vin Weber was the chairman of the NED at that time and he took US taxpayer money through the NED to supposedly bring democracy into former communist states. Then Weber was also a member of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the neocon think tank which really shaped the personnel of George W. Bush in the year 2000 and 2001. And Vin Weber was also a lobbyist for the largest military industrial conglomerate of the US Lockheed Martin.

So, he was instrumental together with another military industrial Lockheed Martin, former Vice President for Strategy named Bruce Jackson, Bruce P. Jackson to promote back democracy in former communist countries including Russia. And they started the process of expanding NATO to the east in strict violation of the pledges that had been given back in the early '90s. So, by 2003, they had begun this whole expansion of NATO into Poland, into Hungary, all the former communist countries.

LS: And the countries at the Baltic Sea.

FWE: So, at the Baltic Sea right on the doorstep of the Russian Federation, and Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and so forth. And you began to see a very definite NATO encirclement of Russia. And then in 2003-2004, the National Endowment for Democracy, George Soros' Foundation, the whole arm of the fake democracy NGOs of Washington, began to create the so called Orange Revolution in Ukraine, and also the Rose Revolution in Georgia next door. And if you look at a map, if you bring a pro NATO government into power in Ukraine, this they did under Viktor Gerashchenko in 2004, then you're presenting a pretty formidable military threat to the national security of Russia.

Now, at that time 2003, Russia was in no shape to do much more than feebly protest as loud as they could but of course they were ignored. Then you had something quite dramatic in 2006, the end of 2006. The George W. Bush administration Donald Rumsfeld was Secretary of Defence back then announced that they were installing ballistic missile defence now I'll get to that in a minute but it's anything but defensive. In Poland, in the Czech Republic and that those anti-missile defence installations which included missiles would be aimed at a rogue nuclear attack from Iran.

In early 2007, Vladimir Putin personally came as president of Russia Federation to the Munich Security Conference, the International Security Conference held here in Munich Germany and gave a speech which really defines the security position of Russia right up to the present date. He said of course this is not aimed at Iran or North Korea as Washington says. That's a lie. It's like taking your right arm to scratch your left ear we say in Russian. It's aimed at Russia. And we consider this intolerable as a threat to our national security and we will be forced to respond.

LS: And it is aimed at Russia as a first strike possibility.

FWE: Yeah. Well, the point about the missile defence is I – in connection with the book, I interviewed, in an earlier book I wrote, I interviewed Colonel Robert Bowman who had been briefly the head of Ronald Reagan's Star Wars or missile defence programme. And became a very, very severe critic of the Bush administration's reckless policies withdrawing from the antiballistic missile ABM Treaty and so forth, said that missile defence is the missing link to Nuclear Primacy. First strike capability.

And that's something that Pentagon planners had been opting for since the 1950s. And he said, "If you can block the counterattack from your opponent and you then have this possibility to make a first strike and wipe them out because they can't simultaneously fire an effective counterstrike." So, that in a nutshell destroys the whole cold war doctrine of mutual and sure destruction that kept nuclear options off the table up until that time. And the Russians understand military strategy rather well I would say. And said, "This is simply intolerable. We have to respond and we will respond but in our own way and you will see."

LS: And the Russians have reacted.

B: The Russians have reacted, and if we can go for a minute up until the present

LS: Please

FEW: On March 1st Putin gave an address to the Federal Assembly in Moscow televised to the nation. The beginning part of the speech, his annual speech there, was about the Russian economy and plans for the future. This was shortly before the Russian elections that overwhelmingly gave him a new term. But the crucial part of that speech to the Federal Assembly was Russia's military technologies and this is as he put it. He referred to that 2007 speech in Munich and he said, "We said at that time that Russia would have to reply and since the expansion of NATO to the east which really to be honest that's – see there is no reason after 1991 or certainly after 2000 for the existence of NATO other than the reason given when NATO was created by the first secretary general of NATO to keep the Russians out the Germans down and the Americans in."

But Putin's speech talked about nuclear primacy and the Russian response and he outlined the military are the developments that they had quietly brought online since Washington tore up, unilaterally tore up the ABM Treaty in 2002/2003. So he outlined an awesome array of missiles, hypersonic low flying stealth missiles carrying nuclear warheads, unpredictable trajectories, invisible against perspective missile defence and air defence systems, unmanned submersible vehicles to great depth that could go many times higher than the speed of submarines cutting edge torpedoes just and commentators in the West like CNN. They said, "Oh, this is just bluff and so forth."

People who know Russian military technology and the intensity of the kind of research and development that's focused on defending the nation confirm that this is no joke. Hypersonic aircraft five times the speed of sound, that's hypersonic and they have something called the [unclear] which goes 10 times mark 10 and as Putin described it, "This missile flying 10 times faster than sound can manoeuvre in all phases of the flight trajectory, overcome all prospective and aircraft county missile defences in a range of 2000 kilometres."

He outlined about six or seven of these I would call them not even cutting edge, bleeding edge military technology and as The Saker commented in his blogpost after the speech, it's indeed set marching game over for the empire. There's no more military option against Russia.

This all is to make a point that the entire history up until now, these fake accusations of Putin would have an interest or Russia would have an interest to meddle with the US elections when you have a choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump to accuse Putin and Russia of international violations of law by allowing a referendum to take place in Crimea after the CIA coup d'etat in Kiev and now it's come out from actual mercenary snipers that were brought in from Georgia under [#inaudible 00:55:08-0#] umbrella that they were paid by the CIA or promised to be paid by cut outs to the CIA to create the Maidan Square February 2014 chaos that led to the collapse of the government and the coup d'etat.

So, you know, this is not Russia is the arch Evel Knievel looking for a fight every corner of the world. It's not Russia doing bad things in Syria. It's Russia trying to stop a NATO and Saudi and other embedded destruction of the Middle East and create some kind of peace and stability. And anyone modest to take the slightest bit of care and follow this, they can read a running commentary on my website williamengdahl.com but not only there, it's all over the place. You realise that the fake media is the media that dominates and is guided by NATO public relations strategy in the West and it's not the so called critical media that's being sanctioned and censored right now.

LS: Let's talk further about the present, William, by closing one circle of our interview. As we've discussed the Russian gold vaults were empty since the early 1990s. This has changed since basically the financial crisis broke out in 2007, 2008, 2009. Since then the Russian Central Bank is buying gold like basically no other nation in a very rapid tempo.

FWE: Since the financial crisis and especially since the opposition of sanctions after the annexation of Crimea in 2014, it's been the policy of the Russian Central Bank and the Russian Federation to buy as much gold for reserves of the ruble as they can get their hands on. And they are now I think number five or number six in the world in terms of gold reserves and correct me if I'm wrong but just slightly behind the people's republic of China which has also been vigorously adding gold towards Central Bank reserves for the yuan.

So, what Russia is doing is creating a buffer gold, by the way in my view has never ceased being an object of value to stand behind currencies. If you have currencies like the dollar after all this 1971 when Nixon took the dollar off the bread and wood, gold exchange [unclear], then if you have a military you might or manipulate the oil price petrodollar and so forth, you can create money if you have the reserve currency you can create money without them. So what the Russia is doing is creating a security in terms of its currency and now that security is probably going to be tested by the economic warfare division of the US Treasury in these new sanctions.

But Russia is merging together with China. Interestingly enough after 2014 when the CIA coup d'etat Ukraine took place, Putin responded not by getting bogged down in the destructive war inside the Eastern Ukraine but he responded by turning east, strengthening his relationships with China, with the new president of China then Xi Jinping bringing the Asian economic Union which Russia is the leading economy in, together with Belarus and Kazakhstan, Armenia and others, bringing that in a coherence with Xi Jinping's Belt and Road Initiative One Belt, One Road to link the infrastructure, the energy pipelines, the high-speed rail networks, the deep water ports and so forth to create a Eurasian, some people call it the land bridge but it's an economic space in Eurasia that would have the majority of the world's population, would have every raw material resource that the world needs including rare earth metals that China is world's leading supplier of at the moment.

And Russia has vast oil and gas reserves and military technology, civilian technology, an educated labour force that is probably one of the finest in the world and scientific country and so forth. And independent of the bankrupt economies of Britain and the United States and very rapidly of the European Union where this banking crisis has, since the crisis of 2008 has just been swept under the rug but it's ready to explode on a moment's notice. So, you have a depth loaded western NATO world. Let's call it a NATO world, a world of the NATO member countries and you have Russia together, which by the way, Russia has unbelievably small

LS: Debt.

FWE: National debt.

LS: Yes.

FWE: Something like 13 to 17% of the gross domestic product.

LS: And now they have this huge stock of gold relative to very little sovereign debt. It's almost ideal.

FWE: Yes, and that's by design. That is by Putin's intention to create this independence. And one thing, I am very often in Russia, have a very, very dear special friends in Russia over the years, the first time I was there was 1994. That was a vastly different, that was in the middle of the Yeltsin and the insanity. The Russians are very not only proud people but they are very determined and they protect their existence and have done that I would say for well over 1000 years going back to the great schism between the Western church in Rome and the Eastern Church in 1054. I think that was a pivotal date in modern history, the division there.

But certainly the Russians have gone through two World Wars and the rape of Russia under Yeltsin, unbelievable trials and tribulations and they are not shying away from defending their existence. That's something I think the west or certainly Washington with these neocons really doesn't have a sense of.

LS: One thing that I would like to ask you about as my final question is the following. You are a renowned expert for the geopolitics and the history of oil. And since this month we have a future's contract in Shanghai, denominated in yuan for oil and we also hear that the Chinese are planning to price oil that they import in yuan which is safe for this buying of oil internationally via yuan, Russia would be the candidate number one as the exporter?

FWE: Definitely. Most definitely and Russia and China are connecting their financial markets ever closer. The Russian government is the in the process sometime this year of issuing Russian bonds denominated new Chinese yuan. The announcing of the petrol yuan, the oil futures contracts being sold in Shanghai, ultimately it won't happen overnight but it's certainly off to a positive start in the marketing acceptance. That has the basis for taking oil sales.

Let's step back a moment to the 1970s and I document this at length in two of my books, Myths, Lies and Oil Wars and A Century of War. In the early 1970s when Nixon took the dollar off of gold, the dollar relative to the German mark and the Japanese yen dropped like a stone, something like 40% over a period of five or six months. And in order to stop that because the New York Banks were hurting quite a bit from that, there was a oil price shock that was orchestrated. I won't go into the details it's documented quite extensively in those two books of mine.

LS: And Sheikh Yamani had said something about this, too.

FWE: Yes. He invited me after reading my book to his annual energy retreat in London in 2000, September 2000. And then called me to a private dinner discussion at his home outside of London to talk about what I wrote about in the book. And he later went on CNN on an interview and mentioned my book by name. In the written transcript it's in there and in the television version they spliced it out so that you couldn't realise that it'd been in there. But Sheikh Yamani told me you are the first journalist or the first person outside of myself that writes correctly what happened with that oil shock. And that was manipulated by among others Henry Kissinger, the Secretary of State and by a group in the Atlantic establishment called the Bilderberg meeting in Saltsjöbaden, Sweden back in May of that period before the Yom Kippur War.

In any case, the US circles around Rockefeller, who at that point was the chairman of the board of USA Incorporated, I would say. They had engineered a 400% price rise in oil and to make sure that Germany and Japan and other countries wouldn't make deals to buy oil in German mark but keep the dollar demand high and the dollar value high. They send a delegation from the US Treasury to sign an agreement with the Saudi Arabian monetary agency for a new relationship taking surplus Saudi petrodollars or OPEC petrodollars and buying US government debt.

LS: Yeah, and outside of the normal auction to privileged conditions.

FWE: Yes. In return, Washington agreed to give the Saudis tens and billions of dollars of defence equipment.

LS: Yeah, and Saudi Arabia would use its status as a swing producer in OPEC that it would only accept dollars as a pricing for oil.

FEW: And the quid pro quo was after 1975, this was formalised that Saudis would as swing producer in OPEC guarantee that OPEC sold its oil only in dollars and that held up until the time of Saddam Hussein during the sanctions shortly before the US invasion and Saddam Hussein began buying oil through a French bank denominated in Euros and not in dollars.

LS: And he made a plus, he made a net plus because he did sell his oil in Euro.

FWE: Yeah, yeah. And so this, what that has done up until the present is prop up the US dollars despite the fact that the internal industrial economy import activity of the United States went down the tubes over the past 40 years since the taking the dollar off of gold and the, putting of English dollars for the world economy. So, the idea than China and Russia would trade in energy and that other economies would begin to sell oil to China, Iran for example is a prime candidate in the petro yuan not in petrodollars, this began slowly like acid drops begins to erode the reserve currency status of the US dollar. And if that goes, it's end game for the US as a financial global power.

LS: We have to make clear to our audience. The fact that you have to buy oil in dollar makes sure that you need dollar, that you acquire dollar in order to buy oil.

FWE: Yeah.

LS: And so if this mechanism goes, well then the US has a problem because the dollars that are floating around internationally would find their way back into the homeland of the US.

FWE: Well, the other thing is that in order to sell now you have under this wonderful Trumponomics as I call it, you have projections that the US annual government deficit, shortage of tax income from tax outgo, spending outgo will by 2020 exceed one trillion dollars a year for every year as far as the eye can see. And by end of 2020, 2028 I think was figured by the congressional budget office, the US public debt is estimated to be well over $33 trillion, it's 20 now, 38 maybe, it's just out of control. So, if the ability of the US dollar to command use in the world economy is severely undermined, you're going to have to raise interest rates so high to sell this debt and it just becomes dysfunctional.

LS: Yes, but you have already in the last few years interest rates payments on this already existing that of per annum $400 billion.

FWE: Yeah.

LS: And if interest rates go up

FWE: Yeah and that was under zero interest rates, but now, you know, if they have to put up interest rates to five, six, seven, 8% like it was in the 1980s. the whole thing just blows up sky high.

LS: And so coming back to gold, gold has the advantage relative to bonds or shares or the US dollar or other Fiat currencies that there is no counterparty risk. If you have the gold in physical form, there is no counterparty risk.

FWE: Right.

LS: So would you say that gold will be one of the ultimate winners of the ongoing financial crisis when it goes into full gear?

FWE: Well, it's documented that J. P. Morgan, Chase and other select banks with this collusion of the Federal Reserve have been artificially depressing the price of gold for years. Every time there's a new financial crisis, they intervene and keep gold within a very tight range. At a certain point that's not going to work anymore and then some people estimate to follow the gold markets much more than I do but it could quickly go up to $10,000 an ounce or even beyond that.

Be that as it may, gold as you point out has no counterparty risk and it's a historic store of value. It's one of the beautiful commodities out there and it has a special – the other just being special significance economically and historically, the other thing is that China is the number one mining producer of gold in the world today, not South Africa. South Africa has fallen far behind

LS: Yeah, and Russia is number three.

FWE: Russia is number three.

LS: And a lot of member states of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation are producers or are buying gold.

FWE: At the rail connections of the circle of the China Belt Road Initiative in part are aiming to go in the areas where there are known gold reserves but no infrastructure during the Soviet era to bring that gold down to market. So, we have an extremely fascinating prospect, not just for China and Russia, for the world really to build up instead of tear down, destroy and burn and bankrupt which is the only policy that Washington seems able to follow these days.

LS: Yeah. To sum it up with a famous Chinese proverb. "May you live in interesting times" – you and all the others.

FWE: We certainly do.

LS: Okay. great. Thank you very much, William, for this interview.

FWE: Thank you, Lars.


Omega a day ago ,

Two things:

1. Operation Hammer:

In 1989 President George H. W. Bush began the multi-billion dollar Project Hammer program using an investment strategy to bring about the economic destruction of the Soviet Union including the theft of the Soviet treasury, the destabilization of the ruble, funding a KGB coup against Gorbachev in August 1991 and the seizure of major energy and munitions industries in the Soviet Union.

Those resources would subsequently be turned over to international bankers and corporations. On November 1, 2001, the second operative in the Bush regime, President George W. Bush, issued Executive Order 13233 on the basis of "national security" and concealed the records of past presidents, especially his father's spurious activities during 1990 and 1991.

http://www.conspiracyarchiv...

2. Why can't Putin touch Yeltsinist oligarchs:

Yeltsin's oligarchs remained as rich as they were; Yeltsin's family still possesses immense riches. And Putin does not dare to touch them. He goes hat in hand to open a Yeltsin's Memorial Centre; he is courteous with Yeltsin's widow and daughter. Putin's establishment cautiously avoided celebration, or even mention of the Revolution centenary, in keeping with Yeltsin's anticommunism. This is the Deal.

https://www.unz.com/ishamir...

Fraser a day ago ,

Given the depth of the fall, the rise (under Putin) has been remarkable.

Guy Fraser a day ago ,

The rise has been astounding and all because they have a leader that can't be bought , not corrupt and loves his country. That is why he literally was swept in in the last election. The Western leaders will not admit it but I am sure they are terribly envious .

Tommy Jensen a day ago ,

Very good article to bring to RI also.

It open eyes on how the West political elite are a criminal rotten cancer syndicate and Georg Bush Sr. shows up to be even worse than the disgusting profile he already has in media and Georg Soros bad reputation gets confirmed.

No police or court are available to take this out. We only have John Connor or The One to count on.
Choice is the problem now. We will have to make a choice.

Play Hide
Nicole Temple a day ago ,

The photo of Yeltsin and Clinton that accompanies this article should remind readers of this story:

https://viableopposition.bl...

There is something rotten in Washington and it has been in existence for decades.

Guy a day ago ,

Great interview .William Engdahl is a very knowledgeable person. I have read a few of his books. Superb in my view.

Jimi Thompson a day ago ,

Quite a few unknown tidbits for me in all of this... very eye-opening even for someone that is aware of the games being played at the higher levels.

To imagine all of what remains unknown, including many of the players, leaves much to the imagination.

[Apr 18, 2018] Macron Napoleonic complex

Apr 18, 2018 | russia-insider.com

In the space of a few days Macron has:

Inadequacy much? How needy for recognition is this guy?

CHUCKMAN 9 hours ago ,

France used to produce some pretty fine leaders, but lately, it's like a different place.

Hollande was the most ridiculous, gutless thing we ever saw. He was laughably pompous and ineffective and dishonest and even cowardly, vis a vis the US.

Macron probably ranks second worst. He's making a mess of France, he's blubbering all kinds of nonsense about the EU, he's busy putting troops in Syria against all international law, he is not liked by the people, and he is virtually a French doormat for America.

Sarkozy showed the odd bit of promise, but he was largely talk with no worthy efforts. And he was immensely corrupt. Imagine taking 20 million euros from Qaddafi and then participating in the scheme to kill him? Or the case of the senile woman who was France's wealthiest woman, from whom he took many millions for his campaigns, doing so in private without other members of the family or strict legal supervision.

Hard to see the same country we saw in de Gaulle's time and that of his immediate successors.

Muriel Kuri 8 hours ago ,

'I am an equal of Putin' - well, he's right in a way - they're both leaders of a country. Beyond that, there is NO comparison. Maybe he admires Putin - which is good, if he tries to emulate him, even better because Putin, after all, is one of the few great current leaders of the world. Macron has a very long way to go, but with many years experience, if he gets the chance, MAY become a better leader than some, but never will be the match of Putin.

[Apr 18, 2018] Obama vs Trump: That is how the political mechanism of faux populism works.

Apr 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jackrabbit | Apr 18, 2018 11:42:04 AM | 142

Don Bacon

Trump's actions have not matched his election rhetoric. Just like faux populist Obama. Obama also "caved" to pressure, and even set himself up for failure by emphasing "bipartisanship".

That is how the political mechanism of faux populism works.

Obama: Change you can believe in
Trump: Make America Great Again

Obama: Most transparent administration ever
Trump: Drain the Swamp

Obama: Deceiver: "Man of Peace" engaging in covert ops
Trump: Distractor: twitter, personal vendettas

Weakened by claims of unpatriotic inclinations:
Obama: Birthers (led by Trump who was close to Clinton's) - "Muslim socialist"!
Trump: Russia influence (pushed by 'NeverTrump' Clinton loyalists) - Putin's bitch!

There's more but I won't belabor the point.

[Apr 18, 2018] The disinformation is so deep, thick and pervasive that there is no way to discern fact from fiction. This is the fruit of Operation Mockingbird and its continuation and addendums

Notable quotes:
"... "Interesting that the PTB cannot keep and maintain a coherent storyline. There is no penalty for backtracking, lying, recanting, revisions." ..."
"... All that is required for the defeat of propaganda is historical memory. Hence, one purpose of the media--particularly the so-called news-cycle -- is to destroy historical memory. This is done in several ways. ..."
"... This destruction is then effected in the minds of the media audience as the inevitable cognitive result of their daily exposure to its "news." People who watch the news are people being daily reindoctrinated into a present that is cut off from and independent of anything that happened in the past--whether fifty years ago, ten years ago, or even yesterday. ..."
"... wonder why suicides and military suicides in particular are at unprecedented levels? ..."
Apr 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

fastfreddy | Apr 17, 2018 11:27:33 AM | 108

The disinformation is so deep, thick and pervasive that there is no way to discern fact from fiction. This is the fruit of Operation Mockingbird and its continuation and addendums.

Interesting that the PTB cannot keep and maintain a coherent storyline. There is no penalty for backtracking, lying, recanting, revisions...

Just move on to the next event.

Karl Rove was correct (was it 15 years ago?)

"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

WJ , Apr 17, 2018 12:24:48 PM | 115

@106,

"Interesting that the PTB cannot keep and maintain a coherent storyline. There is no penalty for backtracking, lying, recanting, revisions."

All that is required for the defeat of propaganda is historical memory. Hence, one purpose of the media--particularly the so-called news-cycle -- is to destroy historical memory. This is done in several ways.

1. The destruction of historical memory is "performed" by the media itself. This is what the Guardian does when it publishes six breathless Skripal stories on six successive days no one of which is consistent with the details of any other, but all of which tell us "Russia did it, Russia did it, Russia did it."

2. This destruction is then effected in the minds of the media audience as the inevitable cognitive result of their daily exposure to its "news." People who watch the news are people being daily reindoctrinated into a present that is cut off from and independent of anything that happened in the past--whether fifty years ago, ten years ago, or even yesterday.

3. This is why, for example, the media and its audience, while being able to acknowledge that the intelligence agencies lied in 2001-2003 for the sake of a predetermined war, are unable or unwilling to accede that this truth is relevant to our situation *today*. Because "today" is somehow always self-standing and unique. The truth of "today" is never related to the recent and more distant historical past as its complex analogue and consequence.

4. Because propaganda is not about truth but about current state-corporate interests it requires the destruction of any historical memory strong enough to test today's propaganda against the measure of the past so as to arrive at a true (or more nearly true) understanding of present politics.

john , Apr 17, 2018 1:08:09 PM | 122
fastfreddy says:

Interesting that the PTB cannot keep and maintain a coherent storyline

they don't have to. the psychosis of the state, its unwritten manifestos, its bent cultural inculcations, is running at full tide, unrestrained and seemingly immune to resistance, of which there is very little anyway. wonder why suicides and military suicides in particular are at unprecedented levels? ...

[Apr 17, 2018] the unbalanced evolution of homo sapiens Ed Schultz I was fired from MSNBC because I supported Bernie Sanders

Apr 17, 2018 | failedevolution.blogspot.gr

Ed Schultz: I was fired from MSNBC because I supported Bernie Sanders The former anchor claims the network was in the tank for Hillary Clinton

MSNBC anchor-turned-Russia Today host, Ed Schultz, told National Review Monday that he believes he was fired from the left-leaning cable news network because he openly supported Bernie Sanders in the Democratic presidential primary. The network, he claims, was in the tank for Hillary Clinton.

The interview itself is fascinating and a shocking look at the inner workings of MSNBC, even if Schultz isn't exactly a reliable narrator. Schultz claims that MSNBC took a heavy hand in dictating what went on air, and that he was often pushed in the direction of a story by higher-ups, even if he felt his audience wouldn't be interested.

Schultz says his trouble at MSNBC started when he informed his bosses that he planned to cover Bernie Sanders' campaign announcement live from Vermont, and that he would be airing the first, exclusive, cable network interview with the progressive presidential candidate. They objected, and even went so far as to tell Schultz to drop the story.

He refused. And was forced to cover a boring news story in Texas, he says.

Schultz is clear on whom he blames: Hillary Clinton.

" I think the Clintons were connected to [NBC's] Andy Lack, connected at the hip, " Schultz told NRO host Jamie Weinstein. " I think that they didn't want anybody in their primetime or anywhere in their lineup supporting Bernie Sanders. I think that they were in the tank for Hillary Clinton, and I think that it was managed, and 45 days later I was out at MSNBC. "

Schultz's stint at MSNBC came to a screeching halt in July 2015, just as the Democratic primaries were heating up. That same week, the network also axed other underperforming shows, but Schultz maintains that he was given the boot because they didn't want him speaking out against Clinton in the heat of the primaries.

Source: https://www.dailywire.com/news/29531/ed-schultz-i-was-fired-msnbc-because-i-supported-emily-zanotti

https://www.youtube.com/embed/9PIOD4YwOwA

system failure due to insufficient evolution? at

[Apr 11, 2018] It's surreal to watch such staggering levels of dishonest incompetence among our globalist "elites".

Apr 11, 2018 | www.unz.com

Anonymous [280] Disclaimer , April 10, 2018 at 5:33 am GMT

It's surreal to watch such staggering levels of dishonest incompetence among our globalist "elites".

This is worrying. Nobody is that stupid so it's more like they don't care about credibility going forward. Like it won't matter.

Kiza , April 10, 2018 at 5:40 am GMT
We have moved way beyond the Skripals case now. Simply put, if US shoots in Syria, Russia will shoot back this time, yes back at US. USS Donald Duck has been placed as a bait to be sent to the bottom of Mediterrenain sea by the Russians, similar to Arizona et al at Pearl Harbour.

Many dissenter websites are currently under attack by the cyber forces of the Western regimes and Israel, one of them being this one. Another site under attack is my favorite johnhelmer.com. In addition to saying that he is under attack, the current message from John is:
WHEN THE RULE OF LAW WAS DESTROYED IN SALISBURY, LONDON AND THE HAGUE, AND THE RULE OF FRAUD DECLARED IN WASHINGTON, THAT LEAVES ONLY THE RULE OF FORCE IN THE WORLD. THE STAVKA MET IN MOSCOW ON GOOD FRIDAY AND IS READY. THE FOREIGN MINISTRY ANNOUNCED ON SUNDAY "THE GRAVEST CONSEQUENCES". THIS MEANS ONE AMERICAN SHOT AT A RUSSIAN SOLDIER, THEN WE ARE AT WAR. NOT INFOWAR, NOT CYBERWAR, NOT ECONOMIC WAR, NOT PROXY WAR. WORLD WAR.

The West is utterly bankrupt, morally as well as financially and we are experiencing the Western remedial plan and actions – war!

annamaria , April 10, 2018 at 5:52 am GMT
"In 2016 an official British government inquiry determined that Bush and Blair had indeed together rushed to war. The Global Establishment has nevertheless rewarded Tony Blair for his loyalty with Clintonesque generosity. He has enjoyed a number of well-paid sinecures and is now worth in excess of $100 million."

– The character of Blair and the Establishment is well established: Blair is a major war criminal supported by the major war profiteers. His children and grandchildren are a progeny of a horrible criminal.

What is truly amazing is the complacency of the Roman Catholic Church that still has not excommunicated and anathematized the mass murderer. Blair should be haunted and hunted for his crimes against humanity.

With age, Blair's face has become expressively evil. His wife Theresa Cara "Cherie" Blair shows the same acute ugliness coming from her rotten soul of a war profiteer.

Blanco Watts , April 10, 2018 at 6:34 am GMT
The UK is governed by the same Neo-liberal psychotic cabal that runs the US, Israel and France.
JR , April 10, 2018 at 7:06 am GMT
Keep in mind how long ago all this is:
Skripal was recruited around 1990 and arrested in 2004. Guess that the Russian attitude towards Skripal took the chaos of the 90′s as mitigating circumstances into account.
Skripal served his sentence of only 13 years till 2010 when he was pardoned and given the option to leave. Russia did not revoke Skripal's citizenship. The UK issued Skripal a passport too. On arrival in the UK Skripak was extensively debriefed by UK intelligence services. Skripal has lived for 8 years in the UK now.

And now out of the blue this incident nicely dovetailing with May ratcheted up anti Russia language only a few months before this false flag incident and the rapidly failing traction of the Steele/Orbis/MI6 instigated Russia collusion story on the basis of that fake Trump Dossier. By the way Orbis affiliated Steele and Miller have been among Skripal's handlers.

Ronald Thomas West , Website April 10, 2018 at 8:43 am GMT
From the Steele dossier lies falling apart to the Skripal lies falling apart to the 'Assad did it' lies falling apart:

https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/04/08/open-letter-to-die-linke/

^

Paul Craig Roberts is correct when quoting The Saker:

"The Russian view is simple: the West is ruled by a gang of thugs supported by an infinitely lying and hypocritical media while the general public in the West has been hopelessly zombified." -- The Saker

I expect that makes the Russians right

[Apr 11, 2018] Unfortuntely, even among friends and aquaintances, the story about evil Assad killing Children is often readily believed

White Helmets was the greatest war propaganda invention since Goebbels "big lie"
The sheeple might realize that they were duped only when it's too late... It's all very darwinian: Elite is too nasty and common people are too stupid and too busy with surviving in economic uncertanty to decipher lies
Notable quotes:
"... "the West is ruled by a gang of thugs" ..."
"... It is depressing to see that there are very few people in the MSM speaking out for reason. One of the few ones is Tucker Carlson. ..."
"... The US, British etc. taxpayer funded propaganda arm of Islamists, the media trained "white helmets" are delivering videos that look almost as real as Hollywood products and most of the sheeple in the western world don't question their propaganda narrative. ..."
"... Well here you go Dutti. Both Glen Greenwald and Amy Goodman are out there in media land championing the 'truth' for good old Isramerika. ..."
Apr 11, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Stuck on Zero -> IridiumRebel Tue, 04/10/2018 - 23:16 Permalink

No other nation will go to war with the U.S. They are too smart. All they have to do is wait till we burn ourselves out and fight amongst ourselves.

IridiumRebel -> Stuck on Zero Tue, 04/10/2018 - 23:18 Permalink

This is my hope.....

beepbop -> IridiumRebel Tue, 04/10/2018 - 23:23 Permalink

"the West is ruled by a gang of thugs"

Those THUGS are Jewish Neocons/Zionists/Bolsheviks. They've got the USG in their pockets. They're the HIDDEN HAND .

Let's tell it like it is.

Dutti -> DownWithYogaPants Tue, 04/10/2018 - 23:38 Permalink

It is depressing to see that there are very few people in the MSM speaking out for reason. One of the few ones is Tucker Carlson.

Unfortunately, even among friends and acquaintances, the story about "evil Assad killing Children" is often readily believed.

The US, British etc. taxpayer funded propaganda arm of Islamists, the media trained "white helmets" are delivering videos that look almost as real as Hollywood products and most of the sheeple in the western world don't question their propaganda narrative.

Very sad and disheartening.

FBaggins -> Dutti Tue, 04/10/2018 - 23:45 Permalink

Well here you go Dutti. Both Glen Greenwald and Amy Goodman are out there in media land championing the 'truth' for good old Isramerika.

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=168513

[Apr 09, 2018] In my opinion, the forces that push for war know they are lying and don't care if a small percentage are on to them. They have the microphone and we do not.

Notable quotes:
"... Without sufficient domain knowledge, you have no immunity from MSM narratives. And, to acquire that knowledge you need to read non-MSM sources (or know people with first-hand experience). ..."
Apr 09, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Babak Makkinejad -> Prince Monolulu , 4 hours ago

Reasonably intelligent people? Like this Iranian woman (in US) whose postings during the war for Aleppo was full of righteous indignation for the rebels. when I told her that the people whose fate she was bemoaning would do many evil things to her as a Shia Iranian woman; she would not hear of it.
ceasley7 -> Babak Makkinejad , 2 hours ago
Couldn't agree with you more Babak. My dad is a 78 year old Orthopedic physician here in the US. He would be considered intelligent by most people. And he is. Except when it comes to Geopolitics. He believes everything the MSM parrots and I gave up long ago in voicing my opinion to him. It's hopeless. And consider the vast majority of the citizens of my country are far less intelligent than him. In my opinion, the forces that push for war know they are lying and don't care if a small percentage are on to them. They have the microphone and we do not.
Prince Monolulu -> Babak Makkinejad , 4 hours ago
Yes, people like that. Without sufficient domain knowledge, you have no immunity from MSM narratives. And, to acquire that knowledge you need to read non-MSM sources (or know people with first-hand experience).

[Apr 09, 2018] Hi, I am from the government. I am here to lie to you

The Brits blinked and did not punish the criminal liar Blair. Since then, the war profiteering based on false flag operations has become a national British pastime.
Notable quotes:
"... The problem for governments using false flag operations like this is many more people are no longer trusting their own governments and quite rightly so. ..."
Apr 09, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

are we there yet -> DuneCreature Sun, 04/08/2018 - 17:56 Permalink

Hi, I am from the government. I am here to lie to you. I have so many lies on top of other lies that sometimes they are true. Even the government has lost track. I am not sure if even MIC or Israel knows anymore.

GreatUncle Sun, 04/08/2018 - 10:51 Permalink

The problem for governments using false flag operations like this is many more people are no longer trusting their own governments and quite rightly so. Human minds are reinforcing the concept of untrustworthy governments that actually lasts far longer than the elected period of time of those who purport to represent the population we now know to be a deceit.

As example, take Blair ex-UK prime minister who concocted the whole Iraq dodgy dossier in the UK who most people I know now call him a war criminal but nobody will put on trial in the Hague. He has not been PM since 2007 but nobody forgets the criminal acts he instigated and supported and will be remembered for a long time for this. So how do you make Blair appear human again to the population?

You can apply this concept to so many elected criminals in the west ... join it up those that rule us are in fact criminals not ordinary people. The psychos rule over us and to them we are no more than dead meat.

[Apr 08, 2018] Do brighter minds incline to honesty by James Thompson

Apr 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

Simon Gächter & Jonathan F. Schulz. Intrinsic honesty and the prevalence of rule violations across societies. Nature, Letter doi:10.1038/nature17160

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZS0JfOGZQNnBhVkE/view?usp=sharing

The authors argued thus:

Good institutions that limit cheating and rule violations, such as corruption, tax evasion and political fraud are crucial for prosperity and development. Yet, even very strong institutions cannot control all situations that may allow for cheating. Well-functioning societies also require the intrinsic honesty of citizens. Cultural characteristics, such as whether people see themselves as independent or part of a larger collective, that is, how individualist or collectivist a society is, might also influence the prevalence of rule violations due to differences in the perceived scope of moral responsibilities, which is larger in more individualist cultures.

If cheating is pervasive in society and goes often unpunished, then people might view dishonesty in certain everyday affairs as justifiable without jeopardising their self-concept of being honest. Experiencing frequent unfairness, an inevitable by-product of cheating, can also increase dishonesty. Economic systems, institutions and business cultures shape people's ethical values, and can likewise impact individual honesty.

I described Gachter and Schultz's work in April 2016, and thought I could immediately see a problem with the interpretation that the authors placed on the results. Putting forward a different perspective took a few days. Getting that new approach published has taken 2 years. For how long will researchers put up with these absurd delays which impede the prompt assessment of arguments?

http://www.unz.com/jthompson/honestly

The authors of this very interesting study, having revealed the cheats, interpreted the national differences as being due to cultural factors, particularly whether there were institutions in each society which encouraged honesty. Of course, this leaves open why one society would have such institutions and another would not. Culture must come from somewhere. A reasonable hypothesis is that the institutions of a county are built by the people who live there. Here is our reply:

Honesty, rule violation and cognitive ability: A reply to Gächter and Schulz
Heiner Rindermann, David Becker, James Thompson.
Intelligence, Volume 68, May–June 2018, Pages 66–69.

https://authors.elsevier.com/c/1Wl5h_3fG8aUwo

Our argument is that both institutions and honesty are determined by the intelligence of people, and that bright people can see the long-term benefits of honesty and of institutions that support honest behaviour. Any institution with a code of conduct leads its members toward probity, and shows prospective applicants what standards are expected of them. However, those institution do not arise randomnly.

Gächter & Schulz assumed that institutional rules affect individual honesty.
We added cognitive ability as further factor explaining national differences.
Stronger effect of IQ (total 0.55) than of rule violation (total −0.34) on honesty.
Stronger effect of IQ (total −0.68) than of honesty (total −0.26) on rule violation.
________________________________________
Abstract
Gächter and Schulz (2016) assumed an effect of institutional rule violation on individual honesty within societies. In this reply we challenge this approach by including a nation's cognitive ability as a further factor for cross-national variations in the prevalence of rule violations and intrinsic honesty. Theoretical considerations, correlational and path analyses show that a nation's cognitive ability level (on average β = |.62|) better explains and predicts honesty and rule violation. While institutional and cultural factors are not unimportant, cognitive factors are more relevant.

The paper argues that there is a causal link between intellectual development and moral awareness: the individual process of development represents an advance from cognitive egocentrism to de-centered thinking, from ethical egocentrism to the consideration of the interests and rights of others.

Cognitive ability seems to have the strongest causal effect on the honesty of a society:

The same pattern holds true if you assume that social levels of honesty intermediate individual levels of honesty as shown by rule violation.

Either way, it seems that intelligence explains whether some societies cheat at games and cheat in real life.


KA , March 23, 2018 at 2:15 pm GMT

Society rots from top and doesn't matter who is at the top. It still remains valid even when the so called least intellectually developed honest poor people get shafted for hundred of years by so called high IQ nations who bring cheating,dishonesty,and violations of existing laws and destruction of existing institutions without replacing them nationwide. Often these newly created institutions are nothing but vehicle to whitewash the corrupting and corrupted new system.

Public moral status has a lot to do with corruption at the top -both local and international in these days of neoliberalism and post -colonization. It sounds painful and hurtful though.

res , March 23, 2018 at 3:18 pm GMT
Interesting work! I am amazed academics have the patience to deal with such a long lag time for letting arguments play out.

Is there any chance of you publishing a scatter plot matrix of the variables you used and/or the data itself?

Do you have the correlation matrix for your variables? By any chance did you try single and multiple variable models to try to predict rule violation from the other variables? It would be interesting to see how much variance an assortment of those models explained.

Has anyone explored the idea of "cheater fraction" (analogous to smart fraction) to explain dishonesty in societies?

James Thompson , Website March 23, 2018 at 5:28 pm GMT
@res

Cheater fraction sounds interesting. I assume that if it is higher than 16% then the society in question is worth avoiding, if at all possible.

Santoculto , March 23, 2018 at 8:17 pm GMT
Honesty can be anything, it's look like obedience to authority instead true or pure honesty
Santoculto , March 23, 2018 at 8:34 pm GMT
@Santoculto

I mean, based on proto-concept used.

Santoculto , March 23, 2018 at 8:37 pm GMT
So ashekl jews [on very avg or not] are the exception in collective terms **
Miro23 , March 23, 2018 at 11:59 pm GMT
It's an interesting question. Some years ago The Economist did a "European Honest Test " leaving a wallet with a fair amount of cash in it (but also including clear contact details of the owner), in capital cities around Europe.

The test was to see how many wallets were returned – and they found that the Scandinavians returned almost all of them, and the Italians returned almost none – with a clear North/South gradient in the results.

By coincidence, at about the same time, I found a wallet beside some rubbish bins with € 400 in it and some credit cards (one from my own bank). So on my next visit, I told them about it and soon got a call from the owner ( a Spanish carpenter working in Germany). His reaction was 1) to check that the money was still in the wallet 2) say that not many people would return a wallet with € 400 in it 3) leave 2 bottles of wine at my front gate.

I checked this reaction with my secretary at the time, and asked her what she would have done, with the answer that it would be a "Regalo de Dios" (Gift of God), i.e. it was not going to be returned to the owner, so there seems to be some anecdotal evidence for the result.

Godfree Roberts , Website March 24, 2018 at 12:31 am GMT
China's position on the Intrinsic Honesty chart is puzzling both at the macro level (remarkably honest, competent policy-makers) and at the individual level (above average IQ).

The Edelman Corporation, which has a lock on international surveys of personal and institutional honesty has consistently found the Chinese to be among the most trusting people on earth, as have World Values Surveys in their own, independent polls of the Chinese.

The source of the discrepancy appears to be the source of the data: "a n indicator of political rights by Freedom House that measures the democratic quality of a country's political practices; the size of a country's shadow economy as a proxy for tax evasion; and corruption as measured by the World Bank's Control of Corruption Index (Supplementary Methods)".

Relying on George Soros' Freedom House for information about China is akin to relying on the neighborhood fox to keep an eye on your chickens while you go on vacation. Garbage in, garbage out

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vSwBCAPkkvGYMGa-7qn79nTF-eX-EnPauQYK8a_NqIAxY7nO7gwjp-m4u9BpRpcOOGZXnkrfe65MOaz/pub .

James Thompson , Website March 24, 2018 at 8:19 am GMT
@Miro23

Regalado.

Anonymous [388] Disclaimer , March 24, 2018 at 10:30 am GMT
I would rate Japan pretty high for getting things returned, but this ethic has eroded over the past three or four decades.

Also, in the past you'd see adult males scolding unrelated misbehaving teens in public, who'd slink away with their tails between their legs. This you do not currently see: men are less masculine and assertive and some teens at least are more beligerant.

Dieter Kief , March 24, 2018 at 11:38 am GMT
I think, David Perkins' findings about high IQ-people being also very tribal would make for a nice addendum here, to better understand how IQ and honesty are related.

I refer to Jonathan Haidt's argument, that he bases explicitly on Perkins' findings, that because of the tendency of high IQ-people to be even more tribal than the lower IQ ranks, ist is so crucial, to understand with J. S. Mill's On Liberty (and I add: with Kant and – – the Kantian Habermas' "Theory of Communicative Action"), that the core achievement of modernity is the institutionalization of disconformation in the democratic/liberal rational discourse and liberal public sphere (universities, the media, etc.).

Here's Jonathan Haidt, referring to Perkins and Mill to make clear, how important the institutionalization of disconformation actually is:

Ilya G Poimandres , March 24, 2018 at 12:12 pm GMT
Correlation≠causation. Maybe honesty leads to brighter minds. Is it your knowing the right answer that makes you follow it, or is it you looking at the situation, as it is, considering evidence and proof, and getting the right answer through correct deductive reasoning, which is then to be followed? You can't be honest and act ideologically, because by definition you follow your observations of the world, not your ideas of the world. An honest person is bound to direct observation, an intelligent person is not. Honesty is probably primary to an accurate understanding of the world.
Wizard of Oz , March 24, 2018 at 1:57 pm GMT
@James Thompson

I think that 16 per cent is a bit arbitrary. In a class or caste dominated society you might, if of a class which can choose to avoid countries, decide that it really doesn't matter if your butler and housekeeper have to terrify the lower orders to stop them ripping you off (and the butler and housekeeper have enough relations they want to place in employment to keep them to the rules as to how much they cheat you).

Wizard of Oz , March 24, 2018 at 2:12 pm GMT
@Miro23

I recently lost my wallet for a short time in a supermarket-plus-other-shops complex as I wheeled my trolley to the car park. I thought my pocket had been picked so went to a nearby poluce station to see if they could accelerate access to CCTV. Mr Plod was useless and unhelpful. (Fortunately I didn't start cancelling credit cards immediately as he pretty well demanded). Back in the shopping centre I was directed to a caretaker's office where a 30 ish man of Pakistani origin had my wallet that had fallen out of my pocket as I went up a ramp. He had taken the trouble to count the cash and wrap it separately with a note on it that the amount was $915 or whatever. I never bothered to count it myself or even unwrap it for several days. What does that say about the standard of civilisation in one of Australia's biggest cities?

Wizard of Oz , March 24, 2018 at 2:41 pm GMT
As anyone who has seen how inadequate religion is today to form moral young people may have thought, the obvious starting point is to ask oneself how I bring up my children and what moral rules I rub in (preferably by example as well as preaching). One knows children are not going to be cunning ruthless sophisticates by nature – unless psychopaths – and will not benefit from being taught to think immediately how they can get away with some theft or lie. So you bring them up with rules which will help to make sure they are both trusted and trustworthy – seeing you return the small amount of change over paid for exsmple to rub in the message about rules they should still be obeying without thought when they have children. Morality is about the customs of the tribe, its mores, and children are rarely done any sort of favour by not being trained to be strictly moral (even if taught Christian forgiveness, especially for the "poor in spirit"). However ..

It occurs to me that the place of intelligence in this may extend to what hss been called Divergent Thinking (does this overlap with Lateral Thinking? Or imagination?)
A quick imaginative laterally thinking brain may think of several ways some dishonest subterfuge may go wrong almost st the moment temptation arises. So honesty for him he quickly concludes is the best policy. And so down the speculative path on which little evidence is to be found. After all what is one to make of the arrogant lawyer that one reads about in the big tax case who thought arrogantly he could get away with something and the Mr Plods of the tax office would never sus him out and prove his wrongdoing to a court?

James Thompson , Website March 24, 2018 at 4:19 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

I was guided by my recollection of the modelling of neighbourhood crime risk, but it is a sliding scale, I agree. I assumed, years ago, that at the 16-20% level one would begin to notice a difference from base rate. See, in this particular example, Fig 2 and Fig 3

http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/hood.htm

Miro23 , March 24, 2018 at 8:06 pm GMT
@Wizard of Oz

What does that say about the standard of civilization in one of Australia's biggest cities?

It doesn't really say anything. You need some standardized parameters and a reasonable sample size. Then you can draw some conclusions and assess the level of accuracy – like The Economist did with their wallet test – quite a good experiment.

However , at the individual level, a continuing positive outcome would be the wallet owner saying thank you, and being more inclined to return the favor one day.

Wizard of Oz , March 25, 2018 at 1:52 am GMT
Yep. Fair enough. (All of it).
Wizard of Oz , March 25, 2018 at 2:08 am GMT
@James Thompson

It occurs to me that 5 per cent might be a horrible worrying prospect if you, as a lawyer or doctor, thought it applied to the five or ten thousand you might come across as fellow professionals in your city or state. But then it could be that you rarely gossip about others and only regard as liars and cheats those who have done it to you (apart from the few who have been busted for insurance fraud). Maybe 16 per cent sometimes fudge or fiddle something but you don't know so you remain happily (and honestly) complacent, and proud of your profession.

Jonathan Mason , March 25, 2018 at 3:24 am GMT
More intelligent people may be more adept at calculating the possible negative consequences of personal dishonesty and they are likely to have more to lose. However, put them in a corporate situation and no doubt they will be as gung-ho as anyone to figure out ways to rip off customers.
Drapetomaniac , March 25, 2018 at 4:13 am GMT
@Miro23

I only look at the lost wallet in one light: it's not my property.

One of the factors I consider when looking at whether a person is a member of mankind or humankind – property.

szopen , March 25, 2018 at 8:57 am GMT
@Miro23

I've lost a wallet once and then I was visited home by shop owner, who carefuly tracked where I could live by using data from the wallet. She wanted nothing in exchange.

On university, I also was also given back a wallet once; I got back also a cellphone (which was quite expansive at the time) I left somewhere few years ago.

OTOH once I left a wallet with cash at university and it was not returned.

So, here you are my anecdotal evidence from Poland: three wallets and one cellphone, one time not returned, two plus one times returned.

szopen , March 25, 2018 at 9:07 am GMT
@James Thompson

"my recollection", " _I_ assumed, years ago" ??? Does that mean La Griffe du Lion is you?!?

Svigor , March 25, 2018 at 9:28 am GMT

More intelligent people may be more adept at calculating the possible negative consequences of personal dishonesty and they are likely to have more to lose. However, put them in a corporate situation and no doubt they will be as gung-ho as anyone to figure out ways to rip off customers.

The purpose of the institution in question is to "figure out ways to rip off customers." It's neither dishonesty nor cheating. The trick is not to have a culture that puts corporate/employer concerns first.

Obviously smarter people are going to tend to be more moral; you need to know what the fuck morality and ethics even are, and assess the circumstances, before you can make your decisions. Retards can't even get to the point of making a decision. Stupid people are great at missing the moral implications of their behavior. Smart people are the ones who need to come up with rationalizations.

animalogic , March 25, 2018 at 9:54 am GMT
All "honesty" begins with the self. Lying to your self, about your self is the basis of delusion and
in-authenticity. How can you know reality when reality is constantly reinterpreted to fit the needs of a run-away ego ?
The general point, that intelligence is linked to long term thinking seems sound to me. Dishonestly is often about immediate gratification: a question of gaining or avoiding immediate pleasure/displeasure. Honesty is a strategy that "pays off" over the long term.
Honesty, or truth telling (in so far as one can) is also a factor in an Honour culture. The liar is a "base" person, a person who has no sense (or no care about) their own social (self conscious) standing. Honesty also has a close correlation with such things as "loyalty", "promising" etc.
animalogic , March 25, 2018 at 10:02 am GMT
@Jonathan Mason

Oh yes !
That's the joy of the corporate structure: no one is responsible. EVERYONE acts because they "owe" obligations to another. (Executives to higher executives; Higher executives to the Board; the Board to Shareholders) Personal, moral responsibility becomes entirely lost in this deliberately confected ethical melange. The Large organisation is the perfect environment for crafting crimes safe from individual consequence.

animalogic ,